A report on the BBC TV programme Newsnight showed Israeli experts in Kurdish areas of north Iraq, drilling soldiers in shooting techniques.

Kurdish officials have refused to comment on the report and Israel has denied it knows of any involvement.

The revelation is set to cause enormous problems for the Kurds, not only in Iraq but also in the wider region.

Inside Iraq as well as in the wider region Israel is seen as an enemy of Arabs and Muslims...

Israeli security experts who spoke to the BBC said they could not have worked inside Kurdistan without the knowledge of the Kurdish authorities.

The news will most probably increase the tension between the Kurds and other Iraqis...

The Israeli government says it is conducting an investigation into the BBC report because it is against Israeli law to export military know-how without prior permission...

The BBC report will be like the smoking gun the Arab media has spent years looking for.

Ever since the US-led invasion of Iraq began over three years ago, Arab journalists have been speaking of Israelis operating inside the autonomous region of Kurdistan...

aktarian

09-21-2006, 05:05 AM

I wonder what Turks will say about this.....

RTK

09-21-2006, 10:55 AM

I'd imagine this is more propeganda. The Turks are all over the Kurdish north. We were pretty close up there and worked with various peshmerga units. So I'll go ahead and throw out the BS flag on this.

SWJED

09-21-2006, 11:11 AM

I'd imagine this is more propeganda. The Turks are all over the Kurdish north. We were pretty close up there and worked with various peshmerga units. So I'll go ahead and throw out the BS flag on this.

...after all - it is BBC.

Uboat509

09-21-2006, 11:45 AM

I came to the conclusion some time ago that BBC stands for Bush Bashing Channel.

SFC W

SWJED

09-21-2006, 12:17 PM

I have found BBC reporting on Africa useful - even if just for the sheer volume of articles and wide coverage of the continent. Like with any MSM source - I read "between the lines" and typically there is useful information to take away.

Bill Moore

09-21-2006, 01:36 PM

I remember the rumors of Israelis in the Kurdish portion of Iraq prior to going in 2003, and even the right wing Israeli website debka.com was covering stories of Israeli advisors there, so the story has been around awhile. It may well all be smoke and mirrors, and folks are simply reporting on ghosts, but the Israelis are well known for executing false flag operations and it wouldn't be unfeasible for them to be there as contractors pretending to be from another nation. I ran into Israeli advisors in other parts of the world under a false flag, they are good at it (necessity breeds competence). From a strategic stand point it definitely makes sense for Israel to seek influence there, as the Kurds could be a useful surrogate force to facilitate operations in Iraq and Iran. It also makes sense for our enemies to start a rumor that Israel is there to further secretarian violence.

Israel has fairly close relations with Turkey, so I doubt they would risk that by doing do much with the Kurds, but who knows? Whatever the case it provides a great idea for a conspiracy novel. :D

Tom Odom

09-21-2006, 01:52 PM

They were there before back in the old days when the Shah was backing the Kurds from Iran. And as Bill points out, you can run into them in the "strangest" places. They were in southern Sudan in the late 60s and early 70s. I worked with them (as contractors) in Zaire and if you remember there were numerous reports on their activities as mercenaries training drug cartel militias in South America in the 80s and 90s.

So while it sounds strange and may be pure "BS," I would not rule it out entirely.

Best
Tom

slapout9

09-21-2006, 05:32 PM

Tom, this a great point about the drug cartels and I don't know for sure but I suspect that it was true. It sure was funny how all those people in central America started wearing the very distinctive Israeli Combat harness??

Strickland

12-03-2006, 06:38 PM

Don't the Kurds provide sanctuary and support to the MEK, PKK/Kongra Gel, and Ansar al Sunnah? I believe all three of these groups are on the US FTO list. If we are truly serious about the GWOT, how about we ask the Kurds to hand these folks over? Even better, in an effort to gain increased influence with the Turks and Iranians, how about we turn them over to those nations for prosecution?

BTW - didnt Barazani assist Saddam against Talabani during the 90s?

Jedburgh

12-03-2006, 08:15 PM

Don't the Kurds provide sanctuary and support to the MEK, PKK/Kongra Gel, and Ansar al Sunnah? I believe all three of these groups are on the US FTO list. If we are truly serious about the GWOT, how about we ask the Kurds to hand these folks over? Even better, in an effort to gain increased influence with the Turks and Iranians, how about we turn them over to those nations for prosecution?

BTW - didnt Barazani assist Saddam against Talabani during the 90s?
MEK was a Saddam-supported entity; the KDP/PUK never "provided sanctuary and support" to that organization. What remains of them are in areas under US control. On our own side, there has been a bit of a moral debate over the potential for exploiting them against Iran for our own benefit. I believe there is a discussion somewhere on SWC on this issue....

PKK/Kongra Gel et al primarily operate out of the heavily mountainous tri-border (Turkey-Iraq-Iran) area. This is an ideal guerrilla sanctuary and has been used as such by Kurds for centuries. There is much else to occupy the nascent Kurdish governing authorities besides hunting down fellow Kurds at the behest of the Turks - for whom no love is lost by Kurds anywhere. Although elements within the Iraqi Kurdish population may support the Turkish Kurds, they KRG does not - but they also do not make any real attempt to detect, deter or prevent militant Turkish Kurds from using Iraqi territory.

The Kurds actively assisted US forces in rolling up Ansar al-Sunnah elements at the beginning of OIF. There wasn't much of them to begin with, and it is highly unlikely that the Iraqi Kurds will stand for an operational re-emergence of that group in Kurdish areas.

Finally, Barzani didn't "assist" Saddam against Talabani - he requested Saddam's assistance in the middle of the civil war between the two Kurdish parties shortly after the PUK began receiving operational assistance from Iran. That incident was a disaster for the Kurds, resulting in the pullout of all USAID OFDA/DART teams from northern Iraq along with the multi-national MCC - with a comcomitant loss of NGO assistance to the rebuilding of Iraqi Kurdistan. Significant lessons learned on all sides.

Strickland

12-03-2006, 09:24 PM

Excellent response.

So are we going to give other nations/groups a similar pass on the presence of groups identified as FTOs? Regardless of what the Kurdish priorities may be at the present, there is still a LARGE presence of PKK/Kongra Gel militants in the vicinity of Mout Qandhil. In addition, there continue to be elements of MEK and Ansar al Sunnah in the Kurdish regions as well. Are we going to give the Pakis and Afghanis a similar pass when it comes to locating and capturing groups identified as FTOs? Are we going to give the Colombians a similar pass in tracking down the FARC?

We get all over the Syrians and even the Lebanese for the presence of extremist groups, though in the case of Lebanon, Hizb allah has been democratically elected, yet we say nothing to the Kurds. I think the average American would not want US dollars going to groups that are on the FTO list.

It just seems as if we hold the Kurds up as a bright shining example of the "possible" in Iraq, when in fact, they harbor groups we have identified as FTOs. Are we in a war on terror or not?

Jedburgh

12-03-2006, 11:46 PM

So are we going to give other nations/groups a similar pass on the presence of groups identified as FTOs? Regardless of what the Kurdish priorities may be at the present, there is still a LARGE presence of PKK/Kongra Gel militants in the vicinity of Mout Qandhil. In addition, there continue to be elements of MEK and Ansar al Sunnah in the Kurdish regions as well.
Didn't I just reply to this?

Are we going to give the Pakis and Afghanis a similar pass when it comes to locating and capturing groups identified as FTOs? Are we going to give the Colombians a similar pass in tracking down the FARC?
I would argue that we already do give these countries "a pass", in the context I believe to which you are referring. Pakistan certainly stands out, a review of key figures in Afghanistan both regionally and nationally will illustrate many operating on at least a temporary "pass", and as for Columbia, more so than the FARC, we are giving them a "pass" on the right-wing paramilitaries.

In some aspects, the "passes" are gross errors of policy judgment, in other cases they are viewed as expedient temporary oversights that permit continued application of pol-mil pressures in higher priority areas. Sometimes these oversights are necessary to preserve a precarious balance of stability until effective alternatives and/or countermeasures are in place.

We get all over the Syrians and even the Lebanese for the presence of extremist groups, though in the case of Lebanon, Hizballah has been democratically elected, yet we say nothing to the Kurds. I think the average American would not want US dollars going to groups that are on the FTO list.
Selective application of moral righteousness is a long-standing aspect of foreign policy.

However, I believe you are going a bit far in your analogies. The last part of your statement would have one believe that US aid dollars to the Kurds are being further funneled to terrorist organizations in a form of policy-directed state-sponsored terrorism. That is utterly and completely false - but it is certainly along the lines of what the government of Turkey is continually disseminating in its long-standing strident propaganda campaign against the KRG.

As I stated in my first post, far more than the Kurds, it is the US that is responsible for what little cohesive bits of the MEK remain in Iraq. I already stated why, and that little moral dilemma is something that has received extremely little coverage by any media source.

It just seems as if we hold the Kurds up as a bright shining example of the "possible" in Iraq, when in fact, they harbor groups we have identified as FTOs. Are we in a war on terror or not?
Despite the weaknesses and faults of the KRG, in contrast to the rest of the country they certainly are a "bright shining example of the possible". Hell, go spend a week each in Baghdad and Basra, then do the same in Suleymaniyah, Irbil and Dohuk. The experience will be enlightening.

And, for emphasis, the KRG is not "harboring" any of these groups, as in the nature of actively providing support and refuge as a matter of policy. The closest to that characterization would be the Kurdish militants from Turkey - and I already attempted to clarify the difference between popular support (as many in the US supported the IRA for years) and official (open or clandestine) support provided by the KRG. The former does exist (strongly in some places - take Boston to further my analogy), the latter does not.

Jedburgh

12-05-2006, 08:01 PM

...with regard to the MEK:

The Jamestown Foundation, 9 Feb 06:

Bulgarians to Dismantle Iranian Terrorist Group MKO in Iraq (http://jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.php?articleid=2369895)

...It has now been confirmed that Bulgarian troops will assume control of the formerly-armed Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MKO) organization's Ashraf camp. This move likely constitutes the final stage of removing the MKO from Iraq, a process that began with the U.S. bombing of the organization's bases in April 2003....

...This will be the first time that non-U.S. soldiers have been involved in dealing with the MKO in Iraq. Interestingly, the Bulgarians' primary task is to ensure security "inside" the camp. There is little doubt this signifies a major development relating to the status of the MKO in the near future, with the camp's complete dismantlement within 12 months a distinct possibility. After all, this is the first time coalition troops have been deployed inside Ashraf. Previously, U.S. forces have been stationed immediately outside the camp and rarely interfere in the daily routine of its inhabitants. ...
CRS, 1 Nov 06: Iran: US Concerns and Policy Responses (http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/76319.pdf)

...U.S. forces attacked PMOI military installations in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom and negotiated a ceasefire with PMOI military elements in Iraq, requiring the approximately 4,000 PMOI fighters to remain confined to their Ashraf camp near the border with Iran. Its weaponry is in storage, guarded by U.S. and now Bulgarian military personnel.

Press reports say that some Administration officials want the group removed from the FTO list and want a U.S. alliance with it against the Tehran regime. Then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice stated in November 2003 that the United States unambiguously considers the group as a terrorist organization. However, the debate over the group was renewed with the U.S. decision in July 2004 to grant the Ashraf detainees “protected persons” status under the 4th Geneva Convention, meaning they will not be extradited to Tehran or forcibly expelled as long as U.S. forces remain in Iraq. At the same time, some Iraqi leaders from pro-Iranian factions, including Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, have said that the group might be expelled from Iraq by early 2007....

Strickland

12-05-2006, 09:37 PM

I wish I could report that either of those reports were entirely correct. Regardless of the initial "plans" or intent, the MEK remains under US "custody." While they no longer have protected person status, they remain guarded by US troops in Iraq.

...Turkey and Iran have quietly worked out a reciprocal security arrangement, whereby Iran's military will engage Kurdish separatists whenever encountered, in exchange for Turkey's cooperation against the Iranian Mujahideen-e-Khalq movement (MEK), a well-armed and cult-like opposition group that previously found refuge in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Both Iranian officials and Turkey's prime minister have alluded to "mechanisms" (likely to involve intelligence-sharing) already in place to deal with security issues of mutual interest. Neither Turkey nor Iran has any desire to see an independent Kurdish state established in northern Iraq.....

tequila

04-25-2007, 01:52 PM

Moderator's Note

The title of this thread was 'Turkish Officials: Troops Enter Iraq' and covered now historical events. There are several, smaller threads on Turkey and the Kurds, both within Turkey and in Iraq, which shortly will be merged into this thread. The thread has been re-titled 'Turkey, Iraq and the Kurds: a merged thread'.

Following the announcement of the proposed Turkish military plan against PKK installations in northern Iraq, witnesses also reported that two Turkish aircraft penetrated Iraqi airspace for about 10 minutes when they flew over Kista, a village near the Iraqi-Turkish border (Azzam, April 16). The Turks are not only putting a military squeeze on Iraqi Kurdistan, but are restricting trade along the Khabour Crossing, a vital trade link for the Kurds, to ratchet up the pressure. Turkish Minister of Foreign Trade Kursad Tuzmen said that Turkish trucks carrying material into Iraq will no longer use the Khabour Gate, whose collection tolls are a major source of revenue for the Kurdish government, and instead will start using the border gate with Syria to transport material into Iraqi territory (al-Bayyna al-Jadidah, April 15). The Turkish military also positioned about 50 tanks along the Turkish side of the Khabour checkpoint. If the Turkish blockade along the Khabour Gate continues, the Kurds will lose a significant source of income and influence. This will likely have a stronger effect in influencing Kurdish actions and rhetoric regarding the PKK ...

LawVol

06-01-2007, 02:03 PM

Turkey's top general said Thursday his army — which has been massing troops on the border with Iraq — was prepared to attack separatist Kurdish guerrillas in a cross-border offensive.

Gen. Yasar Buyukanit said the military was ready and awaiting government orders for an incursion, putting pressure on the government to support an offensive that risks straining ties with the United States and Europe and raising tensions with Iraqi Kurds.

Public support for an offensive is high, especially following the recent killings of soldiers and a suicide bombing that killed six people

Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,276932,00.html

So what does this mean? Is this threat real or just posturing? Part of the justification for not pulling out of Iraq is so that a regional war does not develop. This move would seem to spark it. What role will the peshmerga play? Will they fight Turkey or the PKK? What about the Iraqi government? What will their reaction be to this threat to their sovereignty?

Ski

06-01-2007, 08:05 PM

The threat is very real. Over 15,000 Turks were killed fighting with Kurdish seperatists from the 1980's onward through today. The Turks will not and do not mess around when it comes to Kurds.

Now, will they actually do this?

I don't think it's posturing at all. I also don't think it will lead to a regional war - unless the Iranians and Syrians join in with attacks on their Kurdish populations - and then we are in a seriously tight spot. The Peshmerga will fight the Turks first, and the PKK second...ethnicity will win out.

Don't want to lay odds on the situation but there is no love lost between both sides here.

wm

06-01-2007, 09:57 PM

While I do not discount the longstanding animosity between Turks and Kurds causing an unfortunate engagement, I do doubt the Turks will actually mount a major cross border incursion. Having a low level border viloation omething that they can explain away as an "oops, sorry I didn't mean to cross the border but I was in hot pursuit of these PKK bad boys ," seems well within the range of the posible. What I cannot speak to is the reaction by the folks on the Iraqi side of the border. Given the amount of Turkish investment into the Iraqi Kurds' economy, there may be a lot of room for maneuver.

Two senior security officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media, said the raid was limited in scope and that it did not constitute the kind of large incursion that Turkish leaders have been discussing in recent weeks.

"It is not a major offensive and the number of troops is not in the tens of thousands," one of the officials told the AP by telephone. The official is based in southeast Turkey, where the military has been battling separatist Kurdish rebels since they took up arms in 1984.

The U.S. military said it could not confirm the reports but was "very concerned."

The last major Turkish incursion into northern Iraq was in 1997, when about 50,000 troops were sent to the region...

Abu Buckwheat

06-06-2007, 04:36 PM

... tie this into the small altercation yesterday between Prime minsiter Maliki and President Hashemi (a Sunni) who said (believeing he had been accused of cooperating with insurgents) 'Maybe I should quit' or something to that effect ... would this incursion coupled along with the stagnation in the government be a reason for the KDP/PUK to consider taking their three trained Iraqi Army Divisions, reform the Peshmerga and declare a Kurdish state?

tequila

06-06-2007, 04:40 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Tariq al-Hashimi is a Sunni Arab from the Iraqi Islamic Party, not a Kurd from the north.

I agree that this is not good. I think everything, including Kurdish response, depends on the size and actions of this force, especially how long they intend to stay.

Abu Buckwheat

06-06-2007, 05:19 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Tariq al-Hashimi is a Sunni Arab from the Iraqi Islamic Party, not a Kurd from the north.

I agree that this is not good. I think everything, including Kurdish response, depends on the size and actions of this force, especially how long they intend to stay.

Belay my last... you are correct. Can't tell players without a score card ... I really gotta stop posting in my sleep because I thought it was talibani he got into it with but hey, its night over here ya know. :D

Abu Buckwheat

06-07-2007, 04:31 AM

Seems it was just another of their usual small SOF raids against the PKK.

Jabar Yawir, deputy minister for Peshmerga Affairs in Kurdistan, said: "This afternoon 10 Turkish helicopters landed in a village in Mazouri, which is ... 3 km (2 miles) inside the Iraqi border. They landed with around 150 Turkish special forces."

"After two hours they left and there were no confrontations with the PKK," he told Reuters. He said the village was in a PKK-controlled area.

SWJED

06-08-2007, 08:38 AM

8 June NY Times - Turkey Rattles Its Sabers at Militant Kurds in Iraq (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/08/world/europe/08turkey.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin) by Sabrina Tavernise.

Turkey is stepping up its presence along its border with Iraq to levels not seen in years in an effort to root out Kurdish separatist guerrillas who take refuge in northern Iraq...

And while reports this week of a large Turkish military push into Iraq seem to be untrue, the army is acting with greater urgency here in the southeast, home to a large part of the Kurdish minority, which accounts for one-fifth of Turkey’s population.

On Wednesday the military announced that it was establishing “security zones” in three districts, including Sirnak, east of here, a step reminiscent of emergency rule imposed on this area until 2002 in an effort to destroy a militant group of Kurdish separatists...

SWJED

06-08-2007, 09:19 AM

8 June NY Times editorial - A New Danger in Iraq (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/08/opinion/08fri2.html).

Absolutely the last thing Iraq needs right now is to have thousands of Turkish troops pour across the border into the country’s one relatively peaceful region — the Kurdish-administered northeast. Turkey’s government needs to know that it will reap nothing but disaster if that happens...

Turkey does have a real problem. Guerrillas of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or the P.K.K., have been striking into Turkey from their bases in Iraqi Kurdistan with growing impunity and effect, using plastic explosives, mines and arms that are readily accessible in Iraq.

These strikes have roused powerful passions in Turkey, stoked by generals eager to regain their primacy over the civilian government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, which military leaders loathe for its roots in Islamic politics. So far, Turkish forces have occasionally chased P.K.K. rebels into Iraq, but they have always withdrawn.

Turkey’s feud with the P.K.K. is inextricably tied to other conflicts and rivalries inside Iraq. The most directly relevant is the tug of war between the Kurds, Arabs and Turkmens over the oil-rich region of Kirkuk. Ankara’s fear of fears is that a quasi-independent, Kurdish statelet on its borders could embolden Turkey’s 15 million-strong Kurdish minority to demand autonomy or independence...

wm

06-08-2007, 01:31 PM

Is anyone looking into the possibility that these latest PKK activities might really be the work of poseurs? Why could this not be the work of agents provacateurs who are acting like PKK terrorists in order to stir the pot in the region and distract the Coalition from continuing to do other things further south that may be on the verge of being successful?

Among other things that make me ask this question are the following.
--Have not allegations been made about clandestine Turkish-Iranian cooperation to deal with what each perceives as the "problem" of their Kurdish minorities, especially in light of the improved status of the Kurds in northern Iraq?
--If, as some allege, the Iranians are in fact stirring up the Shi'a-Sunni violence in the south, why would they not be employing a similar tactic between Kurds and Turks up north?
Getting answers to questions like these would be part of my priority intelligence requirements were I in charge of trying to achieve peace and stability in the region.

Steve Blair

06-08-2007, 01:43 PM

The Turks have also been having something of a governmental crisis if memory serves. The timing of this is a bit interesting.

goesh

06-08-2007, 02:21 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6718965.stm

7 Turks Killed in rebel raid (6/4/07)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6687631.stm

Turkish soldiers killed in blast

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6684549.stm

Suicide attack behind Turkey bomb
(please, no puns on this headline)

Culpeper

06-09-2007, 03:57 AM

Well, the Turkish people should have been more careful with what they once wished for? I wonder if it was elements of the Turkish 4th Infantry Division and they had "Red Dawn" painted on their helmets. Or maybe it was the Kurds in Turkey that now refer to themselves as "Wolverines!"....Pun intended@!

Tacitus

06-09-2007, 04:20 AM

The Turks have also been having something of a governmental crisis if memory serves. The timing of this is a bit interesting.

I believe you are correct. There is a conflict between the Army, which sees itself as the guarantor of the modern secular state, founded by Ataturk and an Islamic inspired party in power.

This link to a BBC story describes the conflict:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6615627.stm

I think there have been some high profile murders there of journalists or writers, accused of insulting Turkey's honor. This is a crime in Turkey. I can't recall if the perpreators were Turkish nationalists or Islamic guerillas.
Here's a link to a story about this development:
http://regardlessoffrontiers.org/2007/01/19/turkish-editors-murder-puts-spotlight-on-insult-laws/

I know the EU has balked on admitting Turkey into their union. At first I read that this angered the Turks, then later I read the Islamists there were praising it because they wanted nothing to do with uniting with a bunch of heathens, anyway.

Clearly, there is political unrest there. Would the Turkish army start a war with the Kurds to unify a divided country around an external enemy? Needless to say, this doesn't make things any easier for our efforts in Iraq.

Firestaller

06-09-2007, 08:29 PM

Is anyone looking into the possibility that these latest PKK activities might really be the work of poseurs? Why could this not be the work of agents provacateurs who are acting like PKK terrorists in order to stir the pot in the region and distract the Coalition from continuing to do other things further south that may be on the verge of being successful?

Among other things that make me ask this question are the following.
--Have not allegations been made about clandestine Turkish-Iranian cooperation to deal with what each perceives as the "problem" of their Kurdish minorities, especially in light of the improved status of the Kurds in northern Iraq?
--If, as some allege, the Iranians are in fact stirring up the Shi'a-Sunni violence in the south, why would they not be employing a similar tactic between Kurds and Turks up north?
Getting answers to questions like these would be part of my priority intelligence requirements were I in charge of trying to achieve peace and stability in the region.

The conflicts between Turkey and the PKK have been going on since the 80's. There's no doubt in my mind that the Kurds want their own country and with 14 million Kurds living in Turkey ... they probably want to 'secede' a section of Turkey and join their brethrens in Kurdistan.

In Turkey, where the government has long attempted to suppress Kurdish culture, fighting erupted in the mid-1980s, mainly in SE Turkey, between government forces and guerrillas of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which was established in 1984. The PKK has also engaged in terrorist attacks. In 1992 the Turkish government again mounted a concerted attack on its Kurdish minority, killing more than 20,000 and creating about two million refugees. In 1995, Turkey waged a military campaign against PKK base camps in northern Iraq, and in 1999 it captured the guerrillas' leader, Abdullah Ocalan, who was subsequently condemned to death. Some 23,000–30,000 people are thought to have died in the 15-year war. The legal People's Democracy party is now the principal civilian voice of Kurdish nationalism in Turkey. The PKK announced in Feb., 2000, that they would end their attacks, but the arrest the same month of the Kurdish mayors of Diyarbakir and other towns on charges of aiding the rebels threatened to revive the unrest. Reforms passed in 2002 and 2003 to facilitate Turkish entrance in the European Union included ending bans on private education in Kurdish and on giving children Kurdish names; also, emergency rule in SE Turkey was ended. However, in 2004, following Turkish actions against it, the PKK—renamed Kongra-Gel (the Kurdistan People's Congress—announced that it would end the cease-fire and resumed its attacks. In 2006 there was renewed fighting with Kurdish rebels and outbreaks of civil unrest involving Kurds; an offshoot of the PKK also mounted bomb attacks in a number of Turkish cities. In Sept., 2006, however, the PKK unilaterally declared a cease-fire.

Steve Blair

06-09-2007, 08:51 PM

I believe you are correct. There is a conflict between the Army, which sees itself as the guarantor of the modern secular state, founded by Ataturk and an Islamic inspired party in power.

This link to a BBC story describes the conflict:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6615627.stm

I think there have been some high profile murders there of journalists or writers, accused of insulting Turkey's honor. This is a crime in Turkey. I can't recall if the perpreators were Turkish nationalists or Islamic guerillas.
Here's a link to a story about this development:
http://regardlessoffrontiers.org/2007/01/19/turkish-editors-murder-puts-spotlight-on-insult-laws/

I know the EU has balked on admitting Turkey into their union. At first I read that this angered the Turks, then later I read the Islamists there were praising it because they wanted nothing to do with uniting with a bunch of heathens, anyway.

Clearly, there is political unrest there. Would the Turkish army start a war with the Kurds to unify a divided country around an external enemy? Needless to say, this doesn't make things any easier for our efforts in Iraq.

Another possibility is that someone else is sparking the conflict to distract attention (both within the Turkish army and the country at large) from the political crisis. Who has the most to gain from such a distraction? That, of course, is my "black helicopter" look at it.

wm

06-10-2007, 11:16 AM

Another possibility is that someone else is sparking the conflict to distract attention (both within the Turkish army and the country at large) from the political crisis. Who has the most to gain from such a distraction? That, of course, is my "black helicopter" look at it.

Kurdish separatist rebels declared a "unilateral cease-fire" Tuesday in attacks against Turkey and said they were ready for peace negotiations, but the group maintained the right to defend itself.

The statement came as the Turkish military has been building up its forces along the border with Iraq, threatening to stage a major incursion to pursue Kurdish rebels at their bases. Such an operation could ignite a wider conflict involving Iraqi Kurds and draw in the United States...

Jedburgh

06-29-2007, 07:45 PM

The Jamestown Foundation's Terrorism Focus, 26 Jun 07:

PKK Introduces Use of IEDs Against Turkish Targets (http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.php?articleid=2373498)

The casualties suffered since the beginning of June in Turkey's military operations against Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) members in its southeast region provide a disturbing illustration of the spread of technology and techniques among terrorist groups. Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) have been used by the PKK with deadly effect, killing both Turkish troops and civilians. In recent years, there has been a shift in PKK strategy; the organization now seems to prefer the use of IEDs over direct armed attacks against the Turkish military. More than 30 such attacks by the PKK have been carried out in the past six months alone....
The title is a bit misleading; it should really be "increases", since it's been quite a while since IEDs were "introduced" to the conflict in SE Turkey. And to those intimately involved with Iraq, 30 IED attacks spread over six months seems a ridiculously low number. But despite the relatively low simmering-on-the-back-burner threat it poses to the state, the insurgency in Turkey's southeast is also an integral part of the political struggle being played out between the Turkish military and the ruling AK party, and each casualty-producing attack thus has ripple effects far beyond the original intent of those who emplaced the device.

“Turkey is building up forces on the border. There are 140,000 soldiers fully armed on the border. We are against any military interference or violation of Iraqi sovereignty," Zebari said during a news conference in Baghdad.

Turkey has been pressuring the United States and Iraq to eliminate PKK bases in Kurdish-controlled parts of northern Iraq and has said it's ready to stage a cross-border offensive if necessary.

Zebari said that any problem should be solved through dialogue adding that "Turkey's fears are legitimate but such things can be discussed."
"The Iraqi government try to diffuse the situation," said Zebari, a Kurd from northern Iraq. "The perfect solution is the withdrawal of the Turkish forces from the borders."

"No one wants a new military conflict in the region. These matters should be solved through dialogue and direct negotiations ... there hasn't been any Turkish military violation until now. There are some artillery shelling and some surveillance by Turkish plane."

Turkey has long complained of U.S. inaction against separatist rebels, who have escalated attacks inside Turkey in recent months. Last week, Turkey's military chief asked the government to set political guidelines for an incursion into northern Iraq.

In turnabout is fair play for 2003, I think we ought to promise them to resolve the problem and then at the last minute change our mind.

wm

07-10-2007, 02:01 PM

In turnabout is fair play for 2003, I think we ought to promise them to resolve the problem and then at the last minute change our mind.

Revoking our support to the Turks worked real well when they invaded Cyprus in 1974. :rolleyes:
By the way, I don't think we have anything like the Habur Gate or a twisty little road from the Mediterranean to the Turkey-Iraq border that we can close to the Turks, or do we? ;)

SteveMetz

07-10-2007, 02:31 PM

Revoking our support to the Turks worked real well when they invaded Cyprus in 1974. :rolleyes:
By the way, I don't think we have anything like the Habur Gate or a twisty little road from the Mediterranean to the Turkey-Iraq border that we can close to the Turks, or do we? ;)

To tell you the truth, this could be a good thing. An external threat might focus the attention of Iraqis and encourage them to move toward resolution of their internal problems.

tequila

07-10-2007, 02:45 PM

Unlikely. Given the remarkably divergent views of the different Iraqi communities towards the various heavily-armed foreigners (Americans, Iranians, foreign Arabs) already in their country, I think the addition of Turks will probably only lead to further splits as factions jockey for advantage.

The Turks have been playing the game in the north for as long as we have and already have dancing partners (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/07/08/europe/EU-GEN-Turkey-Iraq.php). One wonders who else will sign up for Turkish funds if Ankara comes in strength.

wm

07-10-2007, 03:28 PM

To tell you the truth, this could be a good thing. An external threat might focus the attention of Iraqis and encourage them to move toward resolution of their internal problems.

Again, I suggest a review of the Cyprus situation. A Turkish threat in Northern Iraq would probably be welcomed by factions in the south as a way of eliminating the Kurdish problem--a lot of Iraqis have about as little use for Kurds as the Turks and many Iranians do.

Your post suggests that there is a strong sense of Iraqi national sentiment. If this were the case, which I seriously doubt, then we would not have the sort of problems that we currently see in country. What the Iraqis most lack, IMHO, is a sense of a national identity. If they had one, I believe the Iraqis would close their borders to outside threats and band together to solve their internal security problems.

I submit that the presuppositions about Iraqis unifying in the face of a common foe as expressed in the above quotation reflect the same type of thinking that led to the adoption of the US small footprint approach in Iraq. It was mistakenly presumed that the Iraqi populace would pull together for the greater good of Iraq once we helped them get rid of that small group of bad guys (Saddam and his Ba'athists) who were holding the majority down.

Iraq represents a conflict, like that found in 18th and 19th Century US (and still to some extent today), between the adherents of states' rights and the supporters of Federalism. In Iraq, however, the states' rights (or tribal rights to be more correct) seem to have the upper hand across the country.

Most other countries in the world have not had the same level of success in "melting pot" experiments that America had in the 19th and 20th Centuries.
Of course many of those other countries also did not choose to engage in the experiment on their own--it was forced down their throats by other countries, much as we seem bent on doing in Iraq today.

Jedburgh

07-10-2007, 03:52 PM

Again, I suggest a review of the Cyprus situation. A Turkish threat in Northern Iraq would probably be welcomed by factions in the south as a way of eliminating the Kurdish problem--a lot of Iraqis have about as little use for Kurds as the Turks and many Iranians do....
Pretty close to the truth. The Turks having a go at Iraqi Kurdistan yet again will not bother the Shi'a and Sunni Arab Iraqi factions, let alone distract them much from their own internecine fighting. However, it will serve to further fragment what (pathetically) little cohesiveness exists within the Iraqi central government, as Kurdish representatives make a (futile) attempt to obtain support from their Arab partners along the lines that Steve mentions.

FYI, there is a lot of good discussion on and around this subject in the Kurdistan IO E-Mail (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=1240) thread.

The northward moves by Kurdish rebels into Turkey in recent weeks and their bombings of Turkish military and civilian targets have been reported extensively, as have the consequent threats by the Turkish military to move into Iraq to bring about a halt to the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) attacks. A firefight with U.S. forces in Iraq on June 23, however, has shed light on the hitherto lesser known southward flow of foreign fighters out of Turkey into Iraq and the role of Turkish al-Qaeda in overseeing that movement....

The morass in Iraq (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Iraq?tid=informline) and deepening difficulties in Afghanistan (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Afghanistan?tid=informline) have not deterred the Bush administration from taking on a dangerous and questionable new secret operation. High-level U.S. officials are working with their Turkish counterparts on a joint military operation to suppress Kurdish guerrillas and capture their leaders. Through covert activity, their goal is to forestall Turkey (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Turkey?tid=informline) from invading Iraq.

While detailed operational plans are necessarily concealed, the broad outlines have been presented to select members of Congress as required by law. U.S. Special Forces are to work with the Turkish army to suppress the Kurds' guerrilla campaign. The Bush administration is trying to prevent another front from opening in Iraq, which would have disastrous consequences. But this gamble risks major exposure and failure ...

Turkish leaders this week will give visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Nouri+al-Maliki?tid=informline) what Turkish military commanders and analysts said could be a final warning to act against anti-Turkey Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/countries/iraq.html?nav=el) -- or to stand by while Turkish forces go after the rebels themselves, risking a new front in Iraq's war.

Leaders of Turkey (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Turkey?tid=informline)'s governing Justice and Development Party (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Turkish+Justice+and+Development+Party?tid=informli ne) appear to be in agreement with Turkey's generals that the time has come to move against the Kurdistan Workers' Party (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Kurdistan+Workers'+Party?tid=informline), known by its Kurdish initials, PKK, in its bases in the mountains of northern Iraq, former generals and a military expert close to the Turkish military's general staff said.

At least 30,000 people have been killed since the Kurdish rebels launched a campaign in 1984 for an independent Kurdish homeland in eastern Turkey. Clashes and bombs this week killed 14 Turkish soldiers and rebel fighters. The rebels also kidnapped eight residents of a Kurdish village in the east.

Turkey accuses Iraq's Kurds -- who have built a nearly autonomous Kurdish state in northern Iraq under protection of the U.S. military (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/U.S.+Armed+Forces?tid=informline) since the early 1990s -- of giving the Kurdish rebels a haven and allowing them free passage back and forth across the Iraqi border into Turkey.

"The Turkish people want the government to do something, and in this case, the Turkish military and government now coincide," retired Turkish Maj. Gen. Armagan Kuloglu said in a telephone interview from the Turkish capital of Ankara (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Ankara?tid=informline) ...

...

Baran and some others expect U.S. forces to join in if Turkey does act against the rebels in northern Iraq. The scenario most often cited is an operation involving U.S. and Turkish special forces already in northern Iraq.

"I do believe that the Americans . . . are probably getting ready to do something jointly with Turkey, but they really don't want the Turks to go on their own," Baran said ...

redbullets

08-06-2007, 12:33 PM

Is anyone looking into the possibility that these latest PKK activities might really be the work of poseurs?

In the past there have been allegations that military units of neighboring countries posed as PKK and attacked civilians in SW Turkey. I worked in Kurdistan for a couple of years in the mid-1990's, and found at least one such allegation credible.

Cheers,

Joe

redbullets

08-06-2007, 12:42 PM

they probably want to 'secede' a section of Turkey and join their brethrens in Kurdistan.

Though I think the leaders of their brethren in Kurdistan are most concerned with keeping the business lamp lit. There are huge amounts of cross-border trade, and lots of capital owned by KDP and PUK leadership is sitting in/heading to off-shore banks. Cost of land in Erbil is now too expensive for most folks living in the northern Virginia area :), so none of those benefiting want to see this messed up.

Cheers,

Joe

redbullets

08-06-2007, 12:52 PM

During my mid-1990's tenure in Iraqi Kurdistan, we called this the Annual Spring Invasion. 35-40,000 troops would enter and set up camp. Turkish General Staff and Parliament would make noise about protecting Turkey, and the Kurds would make noise about the destabilizing effects of the Turkish military activity.

There were a lot of local and expatriate folks working the area back then who believed that, among other things, with the fall of the Wall, the Turkish military needed a new boogey man to justify 1/5th of the GNP going into the military-industrial complex (lots of O-6's driving MB 500 series). There was plenty of credible information about KDP and/or PUK forces fighting alongside the Turkish tourists against the PKK.

My senior program officer, an Iraqi Kurd with more than a decade working these issues on the international scene, says this ain't nothing but a thing. No one wants to screw up the revenue streams heading in both directions.

Cheers,

Joe

redbullets

08-16-2007, 02:46 AM

That incident was a disaster for the Kurds, resulting in the pullout of all USAID OFDA/DART teams from northern Iraq along with the multi-national MCC - with a comcomitant loss of NGO assistance to the rebuilding of Iraqi Kurdistan. Significant lessons learned on all sides.

In addition, OFDA was looking for a good reason to end this mission - it had evolved, in some folks' opinions, into a development scenario as opposed to a protracted crisis, and there was a good deal of institutional angst at USAID over the fact that DoD funds were being employed - too much "military taint" I suppose for the crew back there.

By coincidence, I'm sitting in front of the computer tonight wearing my OFDA DART NIRAQ t-shirt that I've managed to keep in one piece all these years.

Cheers,

redbullets

08-16-2007, 02:58 AM

Don't the Kurds provide sanctuary and support to the MEK, PKK/Kongra Gel, and Ansar al Sunnah? I believe all three of these groups are on the US FTO list. If we are truly serious about the GWOT, how about we ask the Kurds to hand these folks over? Even better, in an effort to gain increased influence with the Turks and Iranians, how about we turn them over to those nations for prosecution?

BTW - didnt Barazani assist Saddam against Talabani during the 90s?

President Talabani's PUK lost 30 or 40 Pesh'merga to an Ansar al Islam (Ansar al Sunnah precursor, more or less) in 2001 or 2002, quite a few of them beheaded. Also during that period there was a nearly successful attempt on Barham Salih's life in which his personal secretary/relative, and several body guards were killed.

Following the attack on the Pesh'merga there was quite a bit of talk among the Kurdish expatriate community about an offer made by Barzani to load up the lads and come on down to assist the PUK in wiping out Ansar al Islam. If memory serves, the PUK had been conducting some form of demobilization then, and didn't have as many Pesh under arms as they might have liked.

I was involved in some work around Halabja from the late-1990's through the beginning of the current conflict, and met with the Mayor and several doctors from the area a number of times during those years. Everyone wanted the Ansar al Islam knuckleheads eliminated. When I visited Halabja in 2004 and 2005 I was struck by how far behind the rest of Kurdistan the region lags, due in large part to the mini-Caliphate that operated there for several years.

Iranian soldiers crossed into Iraq on Thursday and attacked several small villages in the northeastern Kurdish region, local officials said.

U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Christopher Garver said he couldn't confirm the attacks, but five Kurdish officials said that troops had infiltrated Iraqi territory and fired on villages.

The Iranian military regularly exchanges artillery and rocket fire with Kurdish rebels who've taken refuge across the border, but Iraqi Kurdish officials worried that Iran's willingness to cross the border raises the possibility of a broader confrontation that would draw the Iraqi government and U.S. forces into an unwanted showdown.

One Kurdish legislator said that if reports of the attacks were true, then Iraq must "stand firmly" against future Iranian encroachments.

Details of the incursion were sparse. Abdul Wahid Gwany, the mayor of Choman, a village 250 miles north of Baghdad, said Iranian troops crossed the border in 10 places and traveled approximately three miles into the mountainous Iraqi region, bombing rural villages in the process. He didn't say how many Iranian troops were involved.

Jamal Ahmed, the police chief of Benjawin, a village a little more than 200 miles north of Baghdad, said the attacks killed some residents.

"We don't know the amount of casualties as the bombing was continuous and so severe," Ahmed said. Gwany said the attacks also killed many cattle and left villages and farms burned to the ground.

Gen. Jabbar Yawr, a spokesman for the Kurdish militia, said Iranian troops have been lobbing artillery at Iraq from across the border since Aug. 16, though Thursday was the first time that Iranian troops crossed the border.

He said that a statement issued by the Party of Free Life of Kurdistan, a branch of the Kurdistan Workers Party, which is also known as the PKK, claimed credit for the recent assassination of an Iranian intelligence official. Yawr said the Iranian raid was in retaliation ...

A great number of Iraqi Kurdish Islamist groups, including militant Islamist movements, have emerged in the last 20 years. Despite the fact that politicized Islam never seemed to enjoy as much broad popularity in Iraqi Kurdistan as it has amongst some neighboring Arab populations, a number of small Kurdish Islamist groups keep multiplying, splintering and occasionally reuniting.

This study pays particular attention to links between various Iraqi Kurdish Islamist movements, their history, their transformation or splintering into new organizations, and the role of the non-Kurdish Iraqi Muslim Brotherhood in spawning these movements in the fi rst place. A historical “map-tree” of the movements is presented in order to better understand various groups’ roots and their relationships with other Islamist movements in Iraq. In some cases, the support of outside states and foreign Islamist organizations appears crucial to explaining what success political Islam in Iraqi Kurdistan has enjoyed.

Based on fi eldwork and personal interviews conducted in Iraq in 2003 and 2004, this study presents a signifi cant amount of never-before published details about these movements. The conclusion addresses possible strategies for containing radical Islamist movements, and the dilemmas inherent in constructing such strategies.....

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard's most recent campaign of shelling Kurdish villages in northern Iraq, which allegedly targeted members of the outlawed Kurdish opposition group the Party for Freedom and Life in Kurdistan (PJAK), eventually culminated with Iranian troops entering Iraqi Kurdish territory on August 23. According to Iraqi TV Channel al- Sharqiya on August 24, the most recent bombardments by Revolutionary Guard commandos (Pasdaran) led to the evacuation of more than 10,000 Kurds from their villages in the Pishar, Penjwin, Khurmal, Hajj Umaran and Qandil mountain range areas in the Iraqi governorates of Arbil and Sulaymaniyah.

The Pasdaran's hunt for PJAK fighters and activists comes at a critical juncture in Iran's foreign relations and domestic politics. The Iranian government is increasingly isolated internationally over the nuclear issue as well as faces widespread domestic dissent over economic mismanagement, increased political repression and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's foreign policy track record. Far from fulfilling his election promises of ending the country's crony capitalist structures and corruption and thus actually catering to those who had voted for him, Ahmadinejad maintained the economic and political status quo of the country and brought the Pasdaran closer to the government than any other president has done before him. Far from only representing an elite military unit, the Pasdaran now constitute a significant political and economic power in Iran, with an estimated control of more than $12 billion in business, construction and energy ventures.

While sporadic violence in the Kurdish-populated provinces of Iran is nothing new, the Pasdaran's most recent incursion into Iraqi territory, which according to a Kurdish official destroyed several villages, demonstrates the top brass and elite's willingness to defend the integrity of Iran's central government at all costs....

Rex Brynen

09-26-2007, 11:42 PM

A possible indicator of potential Iranian leverage over the KRG (and especially the PUK):

SULEIMANIYYA: Iran's closure of its frontier with Iraq is costing the autonomous Kurdish region $1 million a day, a government minister said on Wednesday, as trucks remained stuck at the border.

...

Iran said on Monday it was closing its frontier with Iraq in protest at the detention last week of Iranian national Mahmudi Farhadi by US troops.

Turkey took a step toward cross-border military action in Iraq today, as a council of the country’s top political and military leaders issued a statement today allowing troops to cross to eliminate separatist Kurdish rebel camps in the mountainous northern region.

Turkey’s move toward military action comes in the face of strong opposition by the United States, which is anxious to maintain peace in that area, one of the rare regions of stability in conflict-torn Iraq.

All government offices and institutions have been ordered “to take all economic and political measures, including cross-border operations when necessary, in order to end the existence of the terror organization in a neighboring country,” said the statement, which was released by the Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/e/recep_tayyip_erdogan/index.html?inline=nyt-per)’s office ...

Turkish warplanes and helicopter gunships attacked suspected positions of Kurdish rebels near Iraq on Wednesday, a possible prelude to a cross-border operation that would be likely to raise tensions with Washington.

The military offensive also reportedly included shelling of suspected Turkish Kurd guerrilla hide-outs in northern Iraq, which is predominantly Kurdish. U.S. officials are preoccupied with efforts to stabilize other areas of Iraq and oppose Turkish intervention in the relatively peaceful north. The White House issued a warning Wednesday against such an incursion "at this time."

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told reporters that a motion authorizing a cross-border operation was being prepared and might reach parliament today. An opposition nationalist party said it would support the motion ...

The government will send a motion to Parliament next week requesting authorization for a cross-border operation into northern Iraq to deal with a terrorist threat based there, with a possible incursion expected to involve up to 15,000 troops, government and security sources said.

If it takes place as planned, this will be the largest-scale cross-border operation on Iraqi soil since 1997, when 50,000 soldiers entered northern Iraq. Sources said the military measures on the Iraqi side of the border will not be confined to a one-time operation carried out by a massive number of troops, as authorities are also planning to boost the existing Turkish military presence in northern Iraq to increase the Turkish military's ability to deal with the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) threat over the border. A 150-member Turkish military base in the Bamerni area near Dohuk in northern Iraq will be reinforced with professionally trained personnel so that operations against PKK bases in the region can be conducted on a more regular basis.

wm

10-11-2007, 02:40 PM

Why would the Turkiye Cumhuriyeti agree to a United States request to stay out of northern Iraq? The US, in the person of its House Foreign Affairs committee, has chosen to ignore Turkey's request not to proceed with a legislative action regarding 1915's Armenian events. Seems like a quid pro quo to me.

tequila

10-12-2007, 01:16 PM

Much more likely a direct response to the killing of 15 Turkish soldiers last week.

The House resolution will make any U.S. request to Turkey much more expensive politically.

The PKK waves the red flag (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071012/ts_nm/turkey_iraq_dc). This will not be unnoticed in Turkey.

Kurdish separatist rebels said on Friday they were crossing back into Turkey to target politicians and police after Ankara said it was preparing to attack them in the mountains of northern Iraq.

A statement by the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) could further increase domestic pressure on Ankara to launch a major offensive that Washington fears could destabilize a relatively peaceful area of Iraq and have ramifications through the region.

"The guerrillas are not moving to the south (northern Iraq); on the contrary they are moving to ... places in the north," the PKK said in a statement published on Firat news agency.

The PKK statement said its fighters planned to carry out attacks against Turkey's ruling AK Party and the main opposition CHP unless certain conditions were met as well as the police force. It did not elaborate ...

Norfolk

10-12-2007, 04:12 PM

Much more likely a direct response to the killing of 15 Turkish soldiers last week.

The House resolution will make any U.S. request to Turkey much more expensive politically.

The PKK waves the red flag (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071012/ts_nm/turkey_iraq_dc). This will not be unnoticed in Turkey.

If some of the PKK are looking for a fight, they've come to the right place. I just can't imagine why they'd deliberately bait the Turks. Do they actually believe that they'll be better off under Turkish Army occupation?:confused: There are at least 140,000 Turks on the frontier, and another 120,000 behind them engaged in keeping a lid on the local populations. Some of the Turkish generals have been champing at the bit for half a year, and the General Staff reportedly completed planning back in late June or early July.

It seems that almost all of the players, on both sides, are trying to drive the Turkish Government to kick over the applecart, and see what happens. Be careful what you wish for...:(

Rex Brynen

10-12-2007, 05:37 PM

If some of the PKK are looking for a fight, they've come to the right place. I just can't imagine why they'd deliberately bait the Turks. Do they actually believe that they'll be better off under Turkish Army occupation?

Yes, they may well think that: it would embroil Turkey in a messy political situation, drive a wedge in the always sensitive relationship between Ankara and the Kurdish Regional Government (and Ankara and Baghdad, and Ankara and Washington), give them easier targets, accentuate repression of Kurds in eastern Anatolia, undercut moderate Kurdish politicians in Turkey, and generally spur PKK recruitment (not only among Kurds in Turkey, but also others--there are a striking number of Iranian Kurds among PKK forces in northern Iraq).

Attacks intended to spur repression or overreaction are a common hallmark of insurgencies (or terrorism).

The downside for the PKK might be less Turkish intervention, but the PUK and especially KDP deciding that they had best deal with the issue themselves rather than risk the Turks having a go.

wm

10-12-2007, 07:07 PM

The downside for the PKK might be less Turkish intervention, but the PUK and especially KDP deciding that they had best deal with the issue themselves rather than risk the Turks having a go.

I see the option of internal resolution by the Kurds as a downside for the PKK only. It could produce a "win-win-win" situation for the Turks, US, and Iraq, IMO.

In fact, taking it a step farther, were the Iraqi government able to field a combined force of its three major groupings (Kurd, Sunni, Shi'a) to deal with the issue, it might even provide the centralized rallying point that seems to be missing from Iraq right now. (Sort of like the "We ain't shaving" incident that coalesced Lee Marvin's Dirty Dozen.) An alternative rallying call of "We Iraqis" against the Turks is not as palatable from a US perspective, but is also a possible outcome.

Hey, maybe we could sell arms to Iran, provide them with military advisors, and get them to cross over the border into Iraqi "Kurdistan" from the east as a counterbalance to the Turks crossing from the Northwest. :wry:
What am I thinking? :o That would be a non-starter. We don't like those Iranians ever since they took over our embassy. How about we send the 82d's DRB to Yerevan in Armenia and threaten to invade Turkey over the Caucacus and conduct a regime change if they cross over into Iraq? I'm sure the "Armenian Genocide Lobby" would back that one to the hilt.
:eek:
Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you wanted the" least smartest" strategy.
I suspect the best thing for America to do is sit back and let the Turks and Iraqis figure it out on their own.

Tom Odom

10-17-2007, 12:33 PM

I suspect the best thing for America to do is sit back and let the Turks and Iraqis figure it out on their own.

Oh Lordy I certainly hope so...somewhere in some closet in AEI there is an analyst coming up with a Guiness brilliant solution :eek:

Tom

wm

10-18-2007, 10:39 AM

Here's (http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=47832) a DoD press release. I find the folllowing extract rather interesting

The Defense Department sent Eric Edelman, undersecretary of defense for policy and former U.S. ambassador to Turkey, to explain the situation in Congress to his opposite number in the Turkish government. But the situation on the border with Iraq is potentially more serious, Morrell said.
. . .

He said the U.S. government is sympathetic to the fact that Turkey is suffering PKK terrorist attacks, but the best way to deal with this threat is through diplomatic means.

“We have urged the Turks to show restraint,” Morrell said. “We understand their frustration, we understand their anger, but we are urging them not to engage in cross-border operations.”

Part of America's expressed national strategy regarding terrorism is that it is better to fight the terrorists in some other country than to deal with them inside our own boundaries. However, we don't want the Turks using that same strategy. Hmmmm :confused:

goesh

10-19-2007, 02:34 PM

they'll say the PKK is buying yellow cake from the US and come pouring across the border, launch air strikes and everything - this would be the perfect covert mission for Valerie Plame to infiltrate disguised as a Diplomat and nab the Turk's war plans

georgev

10-24-2007, 02:52 PM

Turkish warplanes and helicopter gun-ships attack Kurdish rebels along Iraqi border Wednesday, order troops to cross over in pursuit

October 24, 2007, 4:12 PM (GMT+02:00)

A Turkish lawmaker disclosed that the Turkish attack began Sunday, Oct. 21, after more than 12 Turkish troops were killed in an ambush by rebel Kurdish PKK guerrillas. He said F-16 jets and artillery pounded at least 63 rebel positions inside the Kurdish-controlled region and 300 Turkish commandoes were dropped by helicopter into Iraq to hunt down PKK fighters.

There were other reports of Cobra and Super Cobra attack helicopters chasing Kurdish rebels three miles into Iraqi territory after Sunday’s deadly PKK ambush. According to earlier reports, the Turkish counter-attack left 32 Kurdish rebels dead and eight soldiers fell into PKK hands and are still missing.

While the US continues to urge restraint, Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government faces angry demonstrations in Turkish towns demanding an immediate military incursion into Iraq to wipe out the PKK strongholds. Military action was overwhelmingly approved by the parliament in Ankara last week. This month, PKK fighters killed 42 Turkish soldiers and civilians in hit-and-run cross-border raids. Washington has also urged Iraq and its Kurdish leaders to crack down on the PKK hideouts.

Iraqi officials are due in Ankara Thursday to discuss the crisis after Turkish foreign minister Ali Babacan held talks with his Iraqi counterpart Hoshyar Zebari in Baghdad Tuesday.

goesh

10-24-2007, 04:42 PM

http://www.iags.org/iraqpipelinewatch.htm

lists 461 attacks, many minor, on and in relation to pipelines and refineries since 2003 - PKK may well play this card and inflate the number

Rebels? I thought they were insurgents simply wanting a homeland of their own, much like the palestinians? A small slice of Iraq, a tiny piece of Turkey, a bit of Iran and presto! there is a Kurdistan, it even sounds almost like Palestine. An insurgency against Turkish economic, political and social oppression, 3 acres and a donkey for every Kurd, a perfect environment for COIN, smaller and more readily managed, no religious plurality to contend with, oil reserves, etc. Maybe Iran could convince them to settle for just a piece of Iraq and Turkey and be a partner in peace in the upcoming struggle with the US and Israel. Aftrer surviving Saddam and US double-dealing and more of Saddam's iron heel after the double-dealing, I really doubt they are going to passively lie down and fade away

Turkish troops have launched a ground incursion across the border into Iraq in pursuit of separatist Kurdish rebels, the military said Friday — a move that dramatically escalates Turkey's conflict with the militants.

It is the first confirmed ground operation by the Turkish military into Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein. It also raised concerns that it could trigger a wider conflict with the U.S.-backed Iraqi Kurds, despite Turkish assurances that its only target was the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK.

The ground operation started after Turkish warplanes and artillery bombed suspected rebel targets on Thursday, the military said on its Web site. The ground incursion was backed by the Air Force, the statement said.

Turkey has conducted air raids against the PKK guerrillas in northern Iraq since December, with the help of U.S. intelligence, and it has periodically carried out so-called "hot pursuits" in which small units sometimes spend only a few hours inside Iraq.

The announcement of a cross-border, ground incursion of a type that Turkey carried out before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a major development in the conflict, which started in 1984 and has claimed as many as 40,000 lives.

The Kurdish militants are fighting for autonomy in Turkey's predominantly Kurdish southeast, and have carried out attacks on Turkish targets from bases in northern Iraq. The U.S. and the European Union consider the PKK a terrorist organization.

"The Turkish Armed Forces, which values Iraq's territorial integrity and its stability, will return as soon as planned goals are achieved," the military said. "The executed operation will prevent the region from being a permanent and safe base for the terrorists and will contribute to Iraq's stability and internal peace."

Private NTV television said 10,000 troops were taking part in the offensive and had penetrated six miles into Iraq ...

This report attempts to illuminate recent events and the possible longer-term historical consequences of U.S.-Turkish relations, placing them in the context of the current strategic environment as well as considering their potential future implications. Differences in perception since the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq exacerbated inherent divergences of attitudes in the relationship, culminating in a traumatic year in 2007. For the moment, however, any remaining chill between Washington and Ankara seems to be abating somewhat. Perhaps more importantly than provision of the now famous “real-time intelligence,” the United States has given its tacit approval to the Turkish military to stage quick ground operations and surgical strikes against Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) camps in northern Iraq, apparently in return for Ankara to not attempt an invasion and prolonged occupation. Yet tensions remain. When Turkey entered northern Iraq on February 21,1 a State Department spokesman cautioned: "Our strong counsel to the Turkish government is to conclude, as quickly as possible, these operations, to limit them strictly and solely to PKK targets and to work directly with the Iraqi government."

The Turkish General Staff’s rationale behind the incursion is unclear, but possible reasons range from a deep-seated skepticism of the United States’ commitment to intelligence sharing and the quality of the data provided, to a possible calculation that Washington is too distracted by other foreign policy developments—such as Kosova’s declaration of independence—to mount a serious objection. In any case, Turkey’s bold maneuver pushes the envelope of the quid pro quo agreement—to forsake major military incursions into northern Iraq in return for increased intelligence sharing—and once again brings it under new strains.....
Complete 53 page paper at the link.

In recent years, Turkish policy toward northern Iraq has been dominated by three factors:

• Recidivist Ottoman nostalgia and continued resentment at the loss of Mosul and the oil fields of Kirkuk;

• The use of northern Iraq by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) as a platform for attacks into Turkey;

• Fears that the creation of a Kurdish political identity could further fuel separatist sentiments among its own already restive Kurdish minority.

In recent years, the Kurdistan Autonomous Region has developed many of the trappings of a fully fledged state. It currently remains unclear whether it will be able to extend its de jure as well as de facto control over the oil-rich province of Kirkuk. It is also unclear whether the recent cooperation between the KDP and the PUK is likely to be long-lasting. However, regardless of its form, there is likely to continue to be some form of Kurdish political entity in northern Iraq with many of the features, if not the name, of a state.

The PKK is militarily considerably weaker than when it was at the height of its powers in the early 1990s. In the continued absence of a state sponsor, maintaining its presence in the mountains of northern Iraq is of critical importance to the PKK’s ability to continue its insurgency.

However, in the longer term, the PKK is probably a distraction from other, more deep-rooted issues which are likely to remain on the agenda for the foreseeable future. At their heart lies the question of Kurdish identity and how to integrate Kurdish identity—or even multiple Kurdish identities—into the political map of the Middle East. Unfortunately, there do not currently appear to be any obvious answers. What is clear is that Turkey’s Kurdish policies, whether applied to its own citizens or the Iraqi Kurds, have not been successful. Nor is there any indication that they will be any more successful in the future.
Complete 24 page paper at the link.

Jedburgh

03-25-2008, 01:20 PM

The Jamestown Foundation's Terrorism Monitor, 24 Mar 08:

Unwelcome Guests: The Turkish Military Bases in Northern Iraq (http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.php?articleid=2374052)

Following the Turkish military’s raid on northern Iraq in late February, the little-known and poorly understood presence of Turkish military bases in Kurdish Iraq has become a major issue in relations between the two countries. On February 26, the parliament of the Kurdistan region of Iraq approved a motion calling on the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) to demand the closure of all Turkish military bases in northern Iraq. The decision came during the incursion into northern Iraq by Turkish troops against elements of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and demonstrated not only the KRG’s often ambivalent attitude toward the presence of the PKK on the territory under its nominal control, but also the suspicions of many Iraqi Kurds that Turkey is using its war against the PKK as a pretext to stifle their own dreams of independence.

Turkey’s long-term military presence in northern Iraq has generated surprisingly little international attention. In the months leading up to the Turkish incursion in February, there was considerable debate about the impact that Turkish ground troops crossing the border might have on what has long been the most stable region of Iraq and almost none on the several thousand Turkish ground troops who have been deployed in northern Iraq for over a decade.....

kaur

04-03-2008, 10:51 AM

Key Points

l PKK financing has shifted from state support to self-financing through diaspora funding and
drug trafficking.
l Some PKK financiers were arrested in Europe, but what seemed a larger operation in early
2007 has lost momentum.
l Turkey's incursion into Iraq has not ended the PKK's operations, and such military action
will need to be supported by efforts to fight the group's European financing if the threat
posed by the organisation is to be undermined in the medium term.

The Kurdish area in northern Iraq has become one of the most complex fronts in the war in Iraq, a place where Iranian, Turkish, Kurdish, Iraqi and American interests clash. An often perplexing role in the region’s conflicts is played by the Party for a Free Life in Kurdistan (PJAK), an Iranian Kurdish offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) that engages in frequent clashes with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards. PJAK claims its aims “are to unite the Kurdish and Iranian opposition, to change the oppressive Islamic regime in Iran and to establish a free democratic confederal system for the Kurds and the Iranian peoples”. Iran regularly accuses the movement of being a U.S.-funded proxy, but recent PJAK claims that Turkey used U.S. intelligence and U.S.-made bombs in an air raid on a PJAK target have brought the U.S.-PJAK relationship into question.....

On May 27, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced over $15.5 billion in additional state funding to complete the Southeast Anatolian Project (GAP), a huge irrigation and hydroelectric scheme in nine predominantly Kurdish provinces in southeastern Turkey. Speaking in Diyarbakir, the largest city in the region, Erdogan promised that the completion of GAP would create nearly four million new jobs in what has long been the most impoverished and underdeveloped area of the country—and the main recruiting ground for militant organizations such as the PKK. “This is a social restoration project,” declared Erdogan. “This initiative will restrict the terrorist organization’s field for exploitation”.....

.....since it came to power in November 2002, the AKP has failed either to rectify the disparity in socioeconomic conditions between southeastern Anatolia and the west of the country or to reduce the alienation felt by many Kurdish youths. Despite the apparently heavy losses suffered by the PKK in clashes with the Turkish security forces, there is still no indication of a decline in volunteers wishing to join the organization.

Even if the AKP is able to find the money to deliver the promises in the GAP Action Plan and create jobs and improve living standards, there are those who worry that—particularly when it comes to militant Kurdish nationalism—it is all too little, too late. “For years, the government deliberately kept the southeast underdeveloped because it thought the Kurds would be easier to control if they were poor and uneducated,” a retired high-ranking military official told Jamestown. “It was a mistake and we are paying the price with terrorists like the PKK. But even if we destroy the PKK, are the people there going to forget how they have been treated for decades?”

Jedburgh

06-11-2008, 07:04 PM

The Jamestown Foundation's Terrorism Focus, 10 Jun 08:

Turkish Generals Admit Military and Intelligence Coordination with Iran (http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.php?articleid=2374231)

....Although it has long been assumed that security cooperation between Turkey and Iran has included both intelligence-sharing and the coordination of military operations against the PKK and PJAK, Basbug’s statement is the first public confirmation by a high-ranking Turkish military official. Turkey and Iran first signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on security cooperation on July 29, 2004, three months after PJAK’s inaugural congress in April 2004 and two months after the May 2004 decision by the PKK to return to violence following a five-year unilateral ceasefire. This agreement was reinforced on April 17, 2008, by a new MOU (http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2372987) which foresaw a broadening and deepening of security cooperation between the two countries.

Speaking with journalists on the sidelines of an international conference in Istanbul organized by the Strategic Research and Study Center (SAREM), a think-tank established by the Turkish General Staff (TGS (http://www.tsk.mil.tr/eng/index.htm)), Basbug dismissed suggestions that the two countries’ militaries had conducted any joint operations: “Iran and Turkey have been conducting coordinated, simultaneous operations on their respective borders,” said Basbug. “We are sharing intelligence with Iran. We are talking and making plans”....

Four gunmen opened fire on police guarding the U.S. Consulate in Istanbul on Wednesday, sparking a battle that left six people dead, officials said.

Istanbul Gov. Muammer Guler confirmed that three police officers and three of the attackers were killed in the city in Turkey, while another police officer and a tow-truck driver were injured.

Police are now hunting for the fourth attacker who fled in a van, while forensics teams are examining a shotgun left on the grounds at the scene. Police estimated 60 bullets were fired over the course of the gunfight, which lasted several minutes.

More... (http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/07/09/turkey-usa.html)

jkm_101_fso

07-09-2008, 05:40 PM

I'm a big fan of the Kurdish people and their cause; and the PKK keeps making them look bad...but the U.S. consulate? Not really the PKK's Modus Operendi; makes me think it wasn't them.

marct

07-09-2008, 05:53 PM

I'm a big fan of the Kurdish people and their cause; and the PKK keeps making them look bad...but the U.S. consulate? Not really the PKK's Modus Operendi; makes me think it wasn't them.

I would tend to doubt it - the PKK doesn't need stuff like that :wry:. It sounds like a very silly attack - by "silly" I mean it really had no chance whatsoever of actually causing much damage. I suppose it might have been an assassination attempt, or it might just be a couple of wannabe irhab flexing the muscles between their ears.

Stan

07-09-2008, 06:00 PM

Ambassador Wilson’s Remarks after the Attack on the Consulate General in Istanbul

First, I want to express my condolences and those of the US government to the families of three Turkish police personnel who were killed in the attack that took place earlier today on our Consulate General in Istanbul.

The facts are that at approximately 11am, assailants opened fire on the Turkish police post at the main entrance of the consulate. I understand that as many as three assailants may have been killed as well.

I also spoke a short while ago with our Consul General in Istanbul, Sharon Wiener, and understand from her that all of our consulate staff are safe and accounted for.

It is, of course, inappropriate now to speculate on who is responsible for this or why they carried out this action. It is an obvious act of terrorism.

Much more at the link...

Tom Odom

07-09-2008, 06:09 PM

Unlike most missions overseas--especially consulates which tended to be tail end charlie when it came to priority in upgrades, the consulates in Turkey were hardened after the troubles of the late 70s and early 80s. I worked with the Consulate in Izmir 1982-1983 and it moved into a new facility during that period. By comparison, the embassy that Stan and I worked in in Kinshasa or the embassy in Kigali in the early 90s were antiquated affairs. All of that has, gratefully, changed.

Tom

Stan

07-09-2008, 06:22 PM

Unlike most missions overseas--especially consulates which tended to be tail end charlie when it came to priority in upgrades, the consulates in Turkey were hardened after the troubles of the late 70s and early 80s. I worked with the Consulate in Izmir 1982-1983 and it moved into a new facility during that period. By comparison, the embassy that Stan and I worked in in Kinshasa or the embassy in Kigali in the early 90s were antiquated affairs. All of that has, gratefully, changed.

Tom

I can barely imagine what those (ahem) trained Gendarmes in Kin would have done with their Uzis. State has come along way with protection at embassies and consulates post 9/11.

Perhaps hard to attempt an assassination when members rarely leave the compound :wry: Forget that one.

Got to wonder though... was this but a test? What sort of support do we now hope to maintain from Turkish law enforcement? Volunteers to stand in front of US Embassies ?

marct

07-09-2008, 06:29 PM

Much more at the link...

Thanks for the link, Stan! Ambassador Wilson certainly seems to be able to say "I don't know" in so many, and varied, ways :D.

Stan

07-09-2008, 06:36 PM

Thanks for the link, Stan! Ambassador Wilson certainly seems to be able to say "I don't know" in so many, and varied, ways :D.

Hey Marc !
Ever been to Foggy Bottom for diplomatic training, or, at the very least, been around those that have graduated :eek:

I wished I could remember half the responses Tom had at country team meetings following "I don't know" :D

marct

07-09-2008, 06:54 PM

Hey Marc !
Ever been to Foggy Bottom for diplomatic training, or, at the very least, been around those that have graduated :eek:

I wished I could remember half the responses Tom had at country team meetings following "I don't know" :D

Hey Stan,

Nope, never hung around in FB, however, I do live in Ottawa... :cool:. As we used to say up here, "I'm really glad you raised that issue. My position on it is quite clear - it is important and we are studying it intensely... Next question?" :D

RTK

07-10-2008, 01:35 AM

I'd have a hard time believing PKK (or Kongra Gel, or whatever they call themselves this week) were involved. Though listed on the terrorist watch list, they have been rumored by Seymour Hersh as recently as November as being supported by the US (http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/11/27/061127fa_fact?currentPage=all). There are 12 organizations (http://www.egm.gov.tr/temuh/terorgrup1.html) Turkey considers as terrorist groups working within Turkey. Note number 8 at the link and the fact that Turkey has only listed them as a terrorist group within the last 3 years (note also that the EU didn't officially name Hezbollah as a terrorist organization until NOV 2005). This coincides with the same timeline Turkey has sought admission to the EU.

I think this was probably an outside resistance group that probably has no ties to the Kurdish movements, possibly the one listed above. It will be interesting to see what comes out in the coming days.

Rex Brynen

07-10-2008, 02:26 AM

I'd have a hard time believing PKK (or Kongra Gel, or whatever they call themselves this week) were involved. Though listed on the terrorist watch list, they have been rumored by Seymour Hersh as recently as November as being supported by the US (http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/11/27/061127fa_fact?currentPage=all). There are 12 organizations (http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/11/27/061127fa_fact?currentPage=all)Turkey considers as terrorist groups working within Turkey. Note number 8 at the link and the fact that Turkey has only listed them as a terrorist group within the last 3 years (note also that the EU didn't officially name Hezbollah as a terrorist organization until NOV 2005). This coincides with the same timeline Turkey has sought admission to the EU.

I think this was probably an outside resistance group that probably has no ties to the Kurdish movements, possibly the one listed above. It will be interesting to see what comes out in the coming days.

I think your second link is mislinked, since it also goes to Hersh's New Yorker article. I suspect it should go here (http://www.egm.gov.tr/temuh/terorgrup1.html).

It should be noted that Lebanese Hizballah and Turkish Hizballah are entirely different organizations—the former is Shi'ite, while the latter is a Sunni extremist group (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdish_Hezbollah) that originally grew, in part, as a reaction to the PKK.

RTK

07-10-2008, 02:50 AM

I think your second link is mislinked, since it also goes to Hersh's New Yorker article. I suspect it should go here (http://www.egm.gov.tr/temuh/terorgrup1.html).

It should be noted that Lebanese Hizballah and Turkish Hizballah are entirely different organizations—the former is Shi'ite, while the latter is a Sunni extremist group (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdish_Hezbollah) that originally grew, in part, as a reaction to the PKK.

I concur. Wasn't too clear on that part...

Link fixed and thanks for the clarification.

RTK

07-11-2008, 03:45 PM

It appears it may have been #10 (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/world/europe/11turkey.html?ref=world)on the list linked above.

The Turkish media have seized on the reported links of two of the assailants with foreign extremists as proof that the attack on the U.S. Consulate General was an Al Qaeda operation (Yeni Safak, Zaman, July 10). Such a conclusion appears, however, to be based more on a desire to deflect the ultimate responsibility for the attack onto outside forces than on an objective appraisal of the evidence. Even if two of the assailants had been in contact with Al Qaeda, the lack of either a detailed plan or more sophisticated weaponry strongly suggests that the attack was the exclusive work of the assailants themselves.

FWIW, a Turkish friend of mine thought it was related to Turkish Hezbollah, seeing as how the dead terrorists were from the southeast. This dovetailed into a pre-coup "strategy of tension" theory(conspiracy), based around connections between the military and Hezbollah.

At a time when rising Arab-Kurdish tensions again threaten Iraq’s stability, neighbouring Turkey has begun to cast a large shadow over Iraqi Kurdistan. It has been a study in contrasts: Turkish jets periodically bomb suspected hideouts of the banned Kurdistan Workers Party (Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan (http://www.pkk-info.com/), PKK (http://www.cfr.org/publication/14576/inside_the_kurdistan_workers_party_pkk.html)) in northern Iraq, and Ankara expresses alarm at the prospect of Kurdish independence, yet at the same time has significantly deepened its ties to the Iraqi Kurdish region. Both Turkey and Iraq’s Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG (http://www.krg.org/), a term Turkey studiously avoids) would be well served by keeping ultra-nationalism at bay and continuing to invest in a relationship that, though fragile and buffeted by the many uncertainties surrounding Iraq, has proved remarkably pragmatic and fruitful......

Schmedlap

01-26-2009, 03:39 AM

I was watching the Mosaic: World News from the Middle East (http://www.linktv.org/mosaic/streamsArchive/) program from Link TV this morning (podcast (http://www.linktv.org/podcasts) available from iTunes). I nearly spit my Irish Coffee all over my heart-clogging breakfast when I saw this report (http://www.linktv.org/mosaic/20090123): EU to Remove Iranian Opposition Group from Terror List (translated by Mosaic from Al Arabiya TV, UAE). More at al-Arabiya (English) here (http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/01/25/65001.html).

I don't know if it would be prudent to operationally leverage MEK against Iran anytime soon, but it sure would be nice to have that leverage available as a bargaining chip. If the EU takes them off the FTO list, then maybe we will as well? And then we would have the option of openly working with them?

From an earlier piece from Jamestown (http://jamestown.org/news_details.php?news_id=234): "Iran's military will engage Kurdish separatists whenever encountered, in exchange for Turkey's cooperation against the Iranian Mujahideen-e-Khalq movement"

And this from a more recent report (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/02/camp-ashraf-closure-baghdad-iran): "Iraq plans to close a camp for Iranian dissidents who used to cross into Iran to mount assassinations and sabotage - a decision that has sharpened political differences between Baghdad and Washington."

More recently:

Iraq plans to extradite members of an Iranian armed opposition group who have "Iranian blood on their hands," Iraq's national security adviser said Friday during a visit to Tehran.

"Among the members of this group, some have the blood of Iraqi innocents on their hands (and) we will hand them over to Iraqi justice, and some who have Iranian blood on their hands we can hand over to Iran," said Muwafaq al-Rubaie.
- al-Arabiya (http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/01/23/64861.html)I wonder what the near-term fate of the MEK will be?

The latest news:

"Iran said the European Union would be committing a "political" act and may worsen relations if it struck the exiled People's Mujahedeen of Iran from a blacklist of terrorist groups... The EU will decide whether to take the group off the terror list this week."
- Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=ayTduC54grHg&refer=europe#)It seems that there was (and possibly still is) a view within our camp that MEK, while Iran's terrorist, could have been (and maybe still is) our freedom fighter. Given the possible cooperation between Turkey and Iran to crack down on "their" mutual terrorists, and the pressure now being exerted upon MEK by Iraq, it seems that this long, drawn-out issue is now approaching an endgame of some sort. Is this an ally whom we want? I guess, more relevant - is this a group whom the new administration is willing to associate with?

Surferbeetle

01-26-2009, 03:51 AM

From wikipedia A Time for Drunken Horses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Time_for_Drunken_Horses), which can be seen on Cinemondo...

A Kurdish family is trying to survive after the death of its parents. Ayoub, the eldest boy in the family, becomes the head of the household and must do whatever work available to survive. Madi, Ayoub's handicapped brother, is in need of a medical operation. Ayoub goes to great lengths to collect money for the operation by smuggling truck tires with a group of Kurdish villagers near the Iran-Iraq border. Ayoub ultimately falls short of his intended goal and his uncle decides to marry off his sister in return for the groom's family financing Madi's operation on the Iranian side of the border. When they arrive the mother of the groom refuses to accepts Madi and agrees to give Ayoub and his uncle a mule as compensation. The smugglers use mules to carry goods and feed them liquor allowing them to better survive the harsh mountain winter. Near the border, Iranian soldiers seize the villagers'(and Ayoub's) merchandise.

Ken White

01-26-2009, 05:03 AM

I wonder what the near-term fate of the MEK will be?
...Is this an ally whom we want? I guess, more relevant - is this a group whom the new administration is willing to associate with?Panetta if he gets confirmed. Hayden is from the old admin... :wry:

Schmedlap

01-26-2009, 10:45 AM

I was thinking of a decider higher up. I think the President has come into office with unrealistic expectations. Certainly this is the case among the most shrill and ideologically-stubborn of his supporters. To not only fail to meet those expectations, but to then collude with MEK? I think that would just be too much for them. On the other hand, now he has to make decisions instead of speeches.

Ken White

01-26-2009, 04:14 PM

but the guy I named is the likely public face -- and will definitely (or nominally) be in charge of the very long term owners of US interests in MEK.

True on the decisions versus speeches and the first few decisions do not impress me as much more than fluff to keep the base happy. My sensing is that we're going to see some not too smart Defense decisions. I generally chuckle a bit when I see really smart folks outsmart themselves but the potential for some bad damage in the military arena is worryingly present....

Schmedlap

01-26-2009, 11:13 PM

Done deal:

BRUSSELS, Jan. 26 (UPI) -- European foreign ministers in Brussels Monday agreed on a terrorism list that does not include the People's Mujahedin of Iran based in Iraq's Diyala province. Milena Vicenova, the Czech envoy to the European Union, said Friday the latest version of the list of terrorist organizations recognized by the European Union was forwarded to ministers without the name of the PMOI. European miniters approved the list Monday.
- via UPI (http://www.upi.com/Emerging_Threats/2009/01/26/EU_removes_PMOI_from_terrorist_list/UPI-44751232989491/)I wonder if we'll follow suit. That would be very multilateral of us.

Ron Humphrey

01-27-2009, 03:58 PM

The EU thing doesn't seem like too bad a move. That said following too quickly in step with that might be equivalent to too much at once.

Nothing wrong with thinking about it though:D

Schmedlap

01-27-2009, 08:18 PM

Looks like it was already decided in advance...

The State Department has decided to keep Iran's largest opposition group, Mujahedin e-Khalq, on its list of terrorist organizations, according to U.S. officials... The State Department's ruling was approved by then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. U.S. officials said Monday they didn't expect another review of the MEK's status soon under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
- via WSJ (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123301682580817775.html)While a review of MEK's status is not likely anytime soon, the State Department did appoint a "Climate Change Envoy" according to the front page of today's Wall Street Journal, so at least our priorities are straight.

jmm99

01-27-2009, 09:31 PM

from State's 2008 fact sheet (http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/fs/08/103392.htm), and its longer 2005 explanation (http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/fs/37191.htm), DoS's list of terrorist organizations started out as an immigration measure; and then morphed into an aspect of the law enforcement approach to GWOT (use of this term by me should not be construed as endorsement of its general validity).

From what I glean from Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Mujahedin_of_Iran) (probably not its best article), MEK has been around for a long time, is a bit loopy and is aimed at Iran not the US. For intelligence and military purposes, I expect the DoS list is about as (or even less) useful as the lists of subversive organizations put together during the Cold War.

This list could be of use for Federal prosecutors in some cases, but beyond that its actual utility seems questionable (IMO).

PS: I expect we could field better clandestine efforts against Iran than MEK, if we wanted to. From the statements made by the Obama administration that does not seem to be their chosen approach to the problem.

Schmedlap

01-27-2009, 10:48 PM

Regarding military and intelligence uses - it is my understanding that DoD is not permitted to work with them due to their inclusion on the FTO list. Do we quietly work with them, under the radar? I don't know. It wouldn't surprise me. But with the new era of transparency and goodwill to all that has apparently been ushered in over the past week, I wonder about the long-term risk of using an organization like MEK (or any similar organization) behind the scenes. Most, if not all, things that occur behind the scenes eventually get discovered. When it gets discovered, it undercuts the perceived transparency and goodwill.

It seems that the EU gave us a good opening here, removing them from the terror list. Given that Europe is more multilateral, enlightened, and intelligent than we are, in the eyes of many, their decision to remove MEK from the list seems to legitimize more interaction with the organization - or at least openness about continued interaction if we are already working with them.

Ken White

01-27-2009, 10:54 PM

many organizations and individuals, there are some folks in DC that have a long going love-hate relationship with them.

They are a trifle loopy, are tied in with some elements inside Iran and are a Marxist leaning crew that have killed civilians, did take part in the takeover of the Embassy in Tehran and did cooperate With Saddam. They were semi-jailed and were labeled as Protected Persons (under the GC) by us. Go figure -- and stay tuned...:wry:

jmm99

01-28-2009, 02:30 AM

with this statement

For intelligence and military purposes, I expect the DoS list is about as (or even less) useful as the lists of subversive organizations put together during the Cold War.

is that the list is not that useful for identifying enemies of the US that we have to hit directly (overtly or covertly).

E.g., the Real IRA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_IRA) (#38 on DoS) is a bowl of fruit loops, whose use of the term "Real IRA" is an insult to the real IRA of Michael Collins (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Collins_(Irish_leader)), whose true military descendent is found in the Irish Defense Forces, and who came from the same parish (Rosscarbery (http://www.cork-guide.ie/rosscarb.htm)) as my own.

Having said that, the Real IRA has not attacked the US - but they have attacked the UK. For good reasons of reciprocity, US co-operation with the UK as to that group makes sense. However, the UK is the primary actor as to them. A similar situation exists as to ETA and Spain.

The list includes a few groups which are not or questionably directed at either the US, NATO or other allies (e.g., MEK). The political reasons for addition to the list seem as or more important than US intelligence or military reasons. ETIM (the Uighurs) is presented as an example (http://www.cfr.org/publication/9179/):

Does the ETIM target Americans?
The State Department says that in May 2002 two ETIM members were deported to China from Kyrgyzstan for allegedly plotting attacks on the U.S. embassy in the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek, as well as other U.S. interests abroad.
....
Why did the United States decide to target the ETIM?
Experts disagree. State Department officials say they took a tougher line because of persuasive new evidence that the ETIM has financial links to al-Qaeda and has targeted U.S. interests abroad. But some experts call the sharp shift in U.S. policy on Xinjiang an obvious bid for warmer relations with China. The United States had repeatedly rebuked China for human rights violations in Xinjiang and resisted linking the post-September 11 war on terrorism with Chinese attempts to quash Uighur separatism. Skeptics note the timing: The Bush administration’s clampdown on the ETIM came as the United States sought to prevent a possible Chinese veto in any UN Security Council debate over Iraq, shortly after Chinese officials said they would tighten regulations on the export of missile-related technology, and before Chinese President Jiang Zemin’s scheduled October 2002 visit to President Bush’s Texas ranch.

Of the 22 Uighurs detained by us under this designation, 5 were voluntarily freed by the Bush administration - and the rest were cleared by the DC courts (see War Crimes thread for many posts).

Schmedlap

01-28-2009, 12:01 PM

The point I was trying to make... is that the list is not that useful for identifying enemies of the US that we have to hit directly (overtly or covertly).

Understood. Also agree with your other points. Particularly this one.

The political reasons for addition to the list seem as or more important than US intelligence or military reasons.

You got that right. Quote from the WSJ article (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123301682580817775.html) linked earlier:

Some Middle East analysts say the State Department's Jan. 7 ruling could assist President Barack Obama in efforts to hold direct negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear program.
...
MEK leaders say the group has renounced violence and is working to promote a democratic Iran. It says the U.S. is using the terrorism designation as a political tool to spur negotiations with Tehran.My earlier point was simply that the list, in addition to not being useful as a target list, can also be counterproductive because one department of government can unilaterally put a potentially beneficial working relationship off limits. MEK could be an intelligence gathering boon to us, regarding activities inside Iran, but State says MEK is bad, so DoD can't work with them.

Just an observation. Maybe this is the proper order of how things should be. It wouldn't be the first time that someone in a position of authority turned out to be smarter and better informed than me. I hope that is the case.

jmm99

01-29-2009, 01:35 AM

I was mired in considering MEK as a direct action asset; but

S:
MEK could be an intelligence gathering boon to us, regarding activities inside Iran, but State says MEK is bad, so DoD can't work with them.

your suggestion could have some potential.

Rationally, the initial question is whether they have in-country assets that could be useable - and, if so, of what value. The next question is whether they would be willing to hand off their assets. The third question is how far Iranian intelligence has managed to penetrate MEK. Probably, a few more questions as well. However, I expect MEK will continue to be approached more politically than rationally.

S:
... one department of government can unilaterally put a potentially beneficial working relationship off limits...

and, because of the interplay between the Federal statutes, makes any "off limits" play a criminal offense. While the DoS list is not technically a Bill of Attainder, it illustrates some of the problems that gave rise to that clause in the Constitution.

It wouldn't be the first time that someone in a position of authority turned out to be smarter and better informed than me. I hope that is the case.

Me too (as a person not big on MEK); but my hopes have been regularly dashed in the past. :(

Jedburgh

01-29-2009, 02:32 AM

....MEK could be an intelligence gathering boon to us, regarding activities inside Iran, but State says MEK is bad, so DoD can't work with them.....
Not a boon - we should avoid getting on that horse. MEK sources tend to be about as reliable as were INC sources prior to OIF. We need to develop our own independent sources in-country, no matter how difficult it may be, not use those of compromised expats with an unhealthy agenda. Didn't we learn that lesson?

There's also the risk that by using such a source, we legitimize some of the Iranian government's propaganda claims about how we operate - thus making it even more difficult to recruit good sources.

Ken White

01-29-2009, 02:56 AM

...MEK sources tend to be about as reliable as were INC sources prior to OIF ... Didn't we learn that lesson?and we seem to have to re-learn it every 10 to 20 years...:wry:

....There are three interconnected sources of potential violent conflict in the Kurdish region. The first concerns the role the Kurds and the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) will play in Iraq, namely the extent and size of the territory (including the oil-rich region and city of Kirkuk (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=1025)) they will control as part of a federal state. There is a real possibility of secession in the event that the central government and its allies fail to satisfy some of the basic requirements put forward by the Kurds. Kurdish secession, resistance to Kurdish claims on Kirkuk, and other scenarios could plunge Iraq into an all-out civil war.

The second potential source involves the rising tensions in Turkey between the state and its Kurdish minority. Ankara perceives the KRG and the Kurdish successes in northern Iraq as potential threats to its territorial integrity. It fears greater political mobilization by its own Kurdish minority and a stronger Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a homegrown insurgent group with approximately half of its fighters based in northern Iraq. Turks were adamant in trying to prevent the emergence of a robust, autonomous Kurdish state in northern Iraq. This has already emerged as a major irritant in U.S. relations with Turkey, a NATO ally; last year, Washington, under tremendous pressure from Ankara, provided Turkey with a green light to engage in cross-border military operations against the PKK in northern Iraq. Since December 2007, Turkish aircraft have been staging continuous, though contained, operations against the PKK, supplemented by one ground operation. Those operations risk escalating into a Turkish–Iraqi Kurdish conflict with a full-fledged Turkish intervention that could cause other neighbors to do the same.

The third source of conflict is the reaction of Iranian and Syrian Kurds to developments in their neighborhoods. Tehran and Damascus have long opposed Iraqi Kurdish aspirations and have cooperated with each other and with Turkey to stymie Kurdish advances in Iraq. Although Iranian and Syrian Kurds have not received as much attention as their counterparts in Turkey and Iraq, they too have been influenced by the regional events. Increased Kurdish mobilization and instances of violence in both Syria and Iran have alarmed these two regimes. They too may choose to intervene if Iraqi developments are perceived to threaten their territorial integrity.....

George L. Singleton

02-18-2009, 08:54 PM

Any thoughs on the resignation from the cabinet of the Presiident of Iraq of the 3 or 4 cabinet members who represent the Kurds in Iraq? I think their resignations took place Monday or Tuesday of this week, Feb. 17, 18.

Ron Humphrey

02-18-2009, 11:25 PM

Any thoughs on the resignation from the cabinet of the Presiident of Iraq of the 3 or 4 cabinet members who represent the Kurds in Iraq? I think their resignations took place Monday or Tuesday of this week, Feb. 17, 18.

Sooner or later the Kurds are gonna figure out that their bargaining chips with the larger govt aren't quite enough to outweigh the realization that being a part of Iraq is the only thing keeping them from being pummeled by both Turkey and Iran.

Which BTW would seem to be a highly likely scenario should any real effort to separate take place. Too many underlying fears on other players plates.

Then again maybe it's just politics:confused:

George L. Singleton

02-19-2009, 02:20 AM

The Kurds seem to hang onto the old WW I promise of a unified Kurdistan which the League of Nations chose not to honor after all.

I would see similiarites to the Kurds tribal aspirations in the Pukhtuns fractured goals along same lines...but unaware if there was ever a promise of a Pukhtawan as there was an actual undelivered on promise of a Kurdish nation.

jmm99

02-19-2009, 06:35 AM

McClatchy (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/world/story/62419.html) sees a problem between the Kurds and ING.

Posted on Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Iraq's Kurdish-Arab tensions threaten to escalate into war
By Leila Fadel | McClatchy Newspapers

MOSUL, Iraq — At the headquarters of the Kurdistan Democratic Party in Mosul, Khasro Goran, the deputy governor of Iraq's Nineveh province, is worried about the future.

Iraq's Jan. 31 provincial elections have been hailed as a sign that the country is putting its violent past behind it, is moving toward democracy and no longer is in need of a large U.S. military force. Along a 300-mile strip of disputed territory that stretches across northern Iraq, however, the elections have rekindled the longstanding hostility between Sunni Muslim Arabs and Sunni Kurds, and there are growing fears that war could erupt.

We also have a bit more of potential doom and gloom in Sunday's Wash Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/13/AR2009021301648_pf.html).

The war in Iraq isn't over. The main events may not even have happened yet.
By Thomas E. Ricks
Sunday, February 15, 2009; B01
....
Many worried that as the United States withdraws and its influence wanes, the Iraqi tendency toward violent solutions will increase. In September 2008, John McCreary, a veteran analyst for the Defense Intelligence Agency, predicted that the arrangement imposed by the U.S. government on Iraqi factions should worry us for several reasons. First, it produces what looks like peace -- but isn't. Second, one of the factions in such situations will invariably seek to break out of the arrangement. "Power sharing is always a prelude to violence," usually after the force imposing it withdraws, he maintained.

Many of those closest to the situation in Iraq expect a full-blown civil war to break out there in the coming years. "I don't think the Iraqi civil war has been fought yet," one colonel told me. Others were concerned that Iraq was drifting toward a military takeover. Counterinsurgency expert David Kilcullen worried that the classic conditions for a military coup were developing -- a venal political elite divorced from the population lives inside the Green Zone, while the Iraqi military outside the zone's walls grows both more capable and closer to the people, working with them and trying to address their concerns.

How the US politic would view our intervention in an outright Iraqi civil war is a good question for crystal ball soothsayers ?

George L. Singleton

02-19-2009, 09:40 AM

JMM, then of course Syria's Sunnis line up with the old Saddam Sunni clique inside Iraq, while Iran is more evident as it has already (my view) been into the Shiia majority camp politically and militarily for several years now via arms, training private armies, etc.

Yuck!

Jedburgh

02-19-2009, 01:49 PM

McClatchy (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/world/story/62419.html) sees a problem between the Kurds and ING.....
This thread is intended to host discussion and links regarding the broader issues of the Kurds in the region.

For discussion focused on issues between the Iraqi government and the Iraqi Kurds, please post in an appropriate thread (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=1025), or create a new thread in the appropriate location (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/forumdisplay.php?f=64).

George L. Singleton

03-14-2009, 04:12 AM

Local time, Saturday, March 14, within the past two hours, per CNN newsline at bottom of screen just now the Turkish Air Force has bombed Northern Iraq, I presume the Kurdish area.

Anyone have more info on this?

davidbfpo

03-14-2009, 11:26 AM

George,

Nothing on the BBC news, but a search on Google News found multiple stories and on a quick skim most use the official Turkish explanation:

Turkey's military said Friday that its warplanes have successfully bombed several suspected Kurdistan Workers' Party or the PKK rebel bases in northern Iraq. Turkey's state-run news agency Anatolian reported Brigadier General Metin Gurak, a military spokesman, as saying that the attack took place Thursday in northern Iraq's Zap region, which is near the border with Turkey.

Appears like a repeat of earlier strikes and no unusual. Others know the region better than I.

davidbfpo

Tom Odom

03-14-2009, 12:19 PM

George,

Nothing on the BBC news, but a search on Google News found multiple stories and on a quick skim most use the official Turkish explanation:

Turkey's military said Friday that its warplanes have successfully bombed several suspected Kurdistan Workers' Party or the PKK rebel bases in northern Iraq. Turkey's state-run news agency Anatolian reported Brigadier General Metin Gurak, a military spokesman, as saying that the attack took place Thursday in northern Iraq's Zap region, which is near the border with Turkey.

Appears like a repeat of earlier strikes and no unusual. Others know the region better than I.

davidbfpo

That's all I have heard via CNN. Pretty standard stuff, frankly.

Tom

George L. Singleton

03-14-2009, 12:30 PM

Thanks to you both as you gave more detail than is currently available here.

Jedburgh

04-02-2009, 04:23 PM

The Jamestown Foundation's Terrorism Monitor, 26 Mar 09:

PJAK, Iran and the United States: Kurdish Militants Designated Terrorists by the United States (http://www.jamestown.org/programs/gta/single/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=34759&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=26&cHash=8c916b712f)

The United States Treasury Department added (http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/tg14.htm) the Free Life Party of Kurdistan (Parti bo Jiyani Azadi la Kurdistan - PJAK (http://pjak.org/english.php)) to its list of designated terrorist groups on February 4. Operating on the Iranian-Iraqi border under the umbrella of the Kurdistan Workers Party (Parti Karkerani Kurdistan - PKK), PJAK has sought to create an autonomous Kurdish region within Iran since its formation in 2004, though the relationship between Iran and the PKK dates back to the creation of the Islamic State of Iran in 1979. This development also highlights unique dynamics of the relationship between a terrorist organization (the PKK) and a state sponsor (Iran).....

Tom Odom

04-03-2009, 05:20 AM

MEK is in the news here locally and internationally as a pawn again in an Iraqi-Iranian chess game. As of 1 January Camp Ashraf 60 miles north of Baghdad went to ISF control. Gov Iraq says they must go; they don't want to go to Iran; no one else wants them. Have to wait and see how it turns out (the MEK will no doubt lose).

Kurds in Syria have been denied basic social, cultural, and political rights, in many cases stemming from the Syrian state’s refusal to grant citizenship.
Kurdish political opposition in Syria is fractured. Though some join Kurds in other countries in calling for the emergence of a separate Kurdish state, many Kurds reject separatism and have generally been committed to peaceful democratic struggle.
Democratic reforms in Syria that improve the human rights situation for Kurds and non-Kurds could go a long way to alleviate the tension between the Kurds and the Syrian state.
The problems that Syrian Kurds face cannot be truly solved without an effort both to improve the human rights of Kurds throughout the region and to foster their political inclusion in their states of residency.
The United States and European Union should use any diplomatic tools at their disposal to promote appropriate reforms in Syria and the region.

George L. Singleton

04-08-2009, 01:22 AM

I am a mean guy I reckon. I would have let Turkey bring troops into Iraq on condition that they have faught with our troops in the central triangle/Baghdad area. In exchange, from the getgo I would have insisted that Turkey have allowed original troop and material access into Iraq... and today Turkey should allow gradual withdrawals through Turkey.

All take and no give by Turkey is not acceptable to me.

We are in way over our heads in all these areas where ethnic divisions and conflicting claims of soverignty reach back hundreds... in the case of the Palestinians and Israel thousands of years old.

I am exhausted by the events and frictions. The Pakhtuns want a Pakhtunwana Land; the Kurds want Kurdistan; and the Palestinians want all of Israel back, which on it's face is absurd and impossible.

The Armenians in my book have the only valid claim and promise of independence/nationhood dating back to the end of WW I,

President Obama refused to keep his campaign promise and white washed his entier Armenian plan he ran on in his campaign when speaking to the Turkish Parliament this week.

Never mentioned the word "Armenian."

I am happy that Iran and Syria are "upset" over the Kurds. They need to be less arrogant and more humbly accomodating, but that will happen when you know where freezes over.

In Iraq, frankly, the Kurds are the most dependable and loyal allies for NATO and the US. But, they have to reign in cross border attacks into Turkey, which Turkey has every right to react to by return cross border fighting.

At least nine soldiers have been killed and two others injured in a landmine blast in southeastern Turkey, a military commander has said.

The landmine, believed to have been planted by Kurdish fighters, exploded as a military vehicle was passing near the village of Abali in Diyarbakir province."

William F. Owen

04-29-2009, 05:02 PM

We are in way over our heads in all these areas where ethnic divisions and conflicting claims of soverignty reach back hundreds... in the case of the Palestinians and Israel thousands of years old.

I am exhausted by the events and frictions. The Pakhtuns want a Pakhtunwana Land; the Kurds want Kurdistan; and the Palestinians want all of Israel back, which on it's face is absurd and impossible.

... hmmmm... so we are all fighting over the same stuff we always did? Sadly this will come as a great surprise to a great many.

Ken White

04-29-2009, 06:11 PM

Yep......

Schmedlap

07-30-2009, 07:44 AM

Have to wait and see how it turns out (the MEK will no doubt lose).
Tom,
Looks like you nailed it.

Seven Iranian Dissidents Killed at Camp Ashraf (http://uskowioniran.blogspot.com/2009/07/seven-iranian-dissidents-killed-at-camp.html)
Seven Iranian dissidents have been killed at Camp Ashraf, 60 kilometers north of Baghdad, during a surprise raid by Iraqi military and security forces on Tuesday. The camp, in Diyala Province, is run by the Iranian opposition group Mujahideen Khalq Organization (MKO). Iraqi forces have surrounded the camp and clashes are continuing for a second day. - via Uskowi on Iran (http://uskowioniran.blogspot.com/)

Tom Odom

07-30-2009, 08:38 AM

Thanks. The fat lady has not sung as yet...

Courtney Massengale

07-30-2009, 01:54 PM

Thanks. The fat lady has not sung as yet...

There is some interesting information out there about the MeK turning into a cult post-2003. This is probably going to play out more along the lines of Waco.

What's amazing is the amount of restraint the GoI is showing in dealing with the MeK. I might be a hopeless optimist, but this might mark the begining of a responsible GoI that's part of the world community.

Schmedlap

07-31-2009, 12:54 AM

What's amazing is the amount of restraint the GoI is showing in dealing with the MeK. I might be a hopeless optimist, but this might mark the begining of a responsible GoI that's part of the world community.

Not sure that I agree or disagree - just curious what you mean.

How would you have expected the GoI to act? These are individuals whom Iran wants done away with - something that the GoI might prefer to do for them, as a political gesture to smooth relations. But these are also individuals who have some protected status under humanitarian law, so dumping them in a mass grave or locking them up concentration-camp-style are not options as long as US military, diplomats, NGOs, and western media are looking over their shoulders.

It seems to me that on a path of options available to the GoI, narrowed on one side by Iranian pressure and on the other by western pressure, this was straight down the middle. While I could not have predicted the specific actions taken and the precise timing, what they did doesn't seem very surprising to me.

Courtney Massengale

07-31-2009, 07:30 AM

Not sure that I agree or disagree - just curious what you mean.

How would you have expected the GoI to act? These are individuals whom Iran wants done away with - something that the GoI might prefer to do for them, as a political gesture to smooth relations.

This doesn’t only benefit the Iranians. These people believe in just about every failed theory of governance that has been attempted in the 20th century. They're not reasonable people and to presume that they could be somehow integrated into Iraqi society isn't a manageable expectation.

This was an internal policing action by a sovereign nation, not a military opeartion - and that's what's so surprising.

But these are also individuals who have some protected status under humanitarian law, so dumping them in a mass grave or locking them up concentration-camp-style are not options as long as US military, diplomats, NGOs, and western media are looking over their shoulders.

Its also not an either/or situation. The GoI could do what they usually do with internal groups that disagree with them... round up the leaders and toss them into prisons never to reappear again. Just the fact that they used nonlethal methods to deal with this shows a lot of forethought and control.

Not a lot of people are going to criticize the action the Iraqis took because there’s nothing there to criticize. That's nothing short of a miracle considering how sensitive this situiation is.

Team Infidel

07-31-2009, 08:43 AM

There is some interesting information out there about the MeK turning into a cult post-2003. This is probably going to play out more along the lines of Waco.

What's amazing is the amount of restraint the GoI is showing in dealing with the MeK. I might be a hopeless optimist, but this might mark the begining of a responsible GoI that's part of the world community.

I have to agree with you. During my last tour, I spend several weeks at Ashraf interviewing members of the MeK. They are, in the better sense of the word, a cult. This will never end well. Once the GoI go into that compound to round up the members you will see them on the BBC burning themselves. They have done it before in France, and I am almost certain they will do it again here.

Unfortunately, only a small population of these members are really the puppet masters. The rest are the leftovers from the Iran/Iraq war or peasant farmers that were dubbed into joining. They have definitely drunk the koolaid and this will have catastrophic implications in the long run. Problem #1… giving a terrorist organization Protected Persons status in 2003. We all know who to thank for that one.

From the early weeks of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) until January 2009, coalition forces detained and provided security for members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MeK), an exiled Iranian dissident cult group living in Iraq. At the outset of OIF, the MeK was designated a hostile force, largely because of its history of cooperation with Saddam Hussein’s military in the Iran-Iraq War and its alleged involvement in his suppression of the Shia and Kurdish uprisings that followed the Gulf War of 1991. Since 1997, the MeK has been listed as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO) by the United States because of the attacks it has conducted against Iranian targets since the time of its founding in 1965—and particularly due to the assassinations of three U.S. Army officers and three U.S. civilian contractors in Tehran during the 1970s, which were attributed to the MeK. Despite their belief that the MeK did not pose a security threat, coalition forces detained the group and provided protection to prevent the Iraqi government from expelling MeK members to Iran, even though Iran had granted the MeK rank and file amnesty from prosecution. The coalition’s decision to provide security for an FTO was very controversial because it placed the United States in the position of protecting a group that it had labeled a terrorist organization. Among many resulting complications, this policy conundrum has made the United States vulnerable to charges of hypocrisy in the war on terrorism.....

Courtney Massengale

08-06-2009, 05:41 AM

Unfortunately, only a small population of these members are really the puppet masters. The rest are the leftovers from the Iran/Iraq war or peasant farmers that were dubbed into joining. They have definitely drunk the koolaid and this will have catastrophic implications in the long run.

I'm not really sure that the MeK "matters" in the long run. Its going to be rather catastrophic if you're in the MeK, but I'm not sure that anyone will really make an issue out of the MeK going away forever.

The real question is if this will embolden the GoI to go after some other loose ends before the Americans leave. And why wouldn't they? If I was in the Sons of Iraq and didn't want to take a GoI job, I would be paying close attention to what goes on in Ashraf....

This report assesses the views and interests of Iraqis, Iraqi Kurds, regional players and other major stakeholders as the basis for cooperation when interests overlap and preventing conflict when they diverge. Since interests are shaped by history, the report considers the history of Kurds in Turkey and in Iraq. The report also evaluates opportunities for collaboration, and flash-points for conflict escalation between Iraqis, as well as between Turkey and Iraqi Kurdistan. While the region remains volatile, the report notes significant progress in Turkey-KRG relations as a result of constructive dialogue between officials from both sides over the past year.

uwew

01-15-2011, 04:45 PM

Hello

Does anybody have any references to literature about the history of this campaign?

Regards,
uwe

davidbfpo

01-15-2011, 06:05 PM

UWEW,

The Turkish COIN in Kurdistan is - for SWC - largely overlooked I suspect. Try the search tools. I found at least a dozen likely places where items maybe located. Good luck.

SteveMetz

01-15-2011, 06:57 PM

I'm exchanging email with a guy writing a Ph.D. thesis on it at the Turkish War College. I could link you up with him.

Jedburgh

01-15-2011, 07:10 PM

If you have a local library that carries Jane's Intelligence Review (http://jir.janes.com/public/jir/index.shtml), they have had a number of good pieces on that conflict over the years. You can also run a search at the Jamestown Foundation's website (http://www.jamestown.org/programs/gta/) for "PKK" and you'll get a number of articles that you can sift through. And Human Rights Watch (http://www.hrw.org[/URL) has published a few papers over the past two decades on issues of Kurdish displacement, war crimes, and language rights. Just select Turkey on their publications menu and scroll back through the years.

From more of a political POV, Gunter's The Kurds and the Future of Turkey (http://www.amazon.com/Kurds-Future-Turkey-Michael-Gunter/dp/0312172656), Olson's The Kurdish Nationalist Movement in the 1990s (http://www.amazon.com/Kurdish-Nationalist-Movement-1990s-Impact/dp/0813108969) and Barkey & Fuller's Turkey's Kurdish Question (http://www.amazon.com/Question-Carnegie-Commission-Preventing-Conflict/dp/0847685535) are useful.

A very good read providing the POV of the individual Turkish soldier during the height of the conflict in the '90s, which was eventually banned (http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0999/9909037.html) in Turkey, is Mehmedin Kitabi: Güneydoğu'da Savaşmış Askerler Anlatıyor (http://www.ceng.metu.edu.tr/~e112908/mehmet.htm). Unfortunately, I'm not aware of an English edition.

Finally, here's a few links to papers you may find of interest:

UNESCO, 2002: The Decline of PKK and the Viability of a One-state Solution in Turkey (http://www.mmo.gr/pdf/library/Balkans/PKK%20in%20Turkey.pdf)

U of Helsinki Dissertation, Sep 02: The Invisible War in North Kurdistan (http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/val/sospo/vk/koivunen/)

CSIS, 31 Oct 07: Turkey’s Military Options for Dealing with the PKK: A Preliminary Assessment (http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/071029_pkk_6.pdf)

GeoForum, May 08: Environmental Destruction as a Counterinsurgency Strategy in the Kurdistan region of Turkey (http://envirozan.info/EZ_Docs/Environment/vanEttn-Kurdistan_Geofor08.pdf)

But the literature is sparse; it certainly deserves a much more thorough study than what is currently available.

orko_8

01-15-2011, 08:10 PM

Hello

Does anybody have any references to literature about the history of this campaign?

Regards,
uwe

This is an extremely though subject for an academic work. There are several reasons for this:

1. It maybe surprising for most non-Turkish researchers that, the Turkish Joint Staff is very open to academic scholars for historical studies. Archives of Cyprus operation, Independence War First World War were opened to many foreign researchers and historians. However, the struggle against PKK, officially called as "Ic Guvenlik Harekati" (Operation for Internal Security) is an ongoing operation. Thus, you may not get success at getting answers from Turkish military.

2. The literature has a lot of articles, books and other materiel directly and indirectly financed and/or suppported by PKK and its extensions. The book "Mehmedin Kitabi" is one of them: having an incredible number of inconsistencies and mistakes about military service and the situation in the SE region of Turkey. PKK, unlike many other seperatist terrorist organzations in the world, is extremely successful at PR campaigns. So you may find it difficult to get a neutral POV. (Note: The PhD dissertation at U of Helsinki is a shame for the university to say the least. I got the feeling that I'm not living in Turkey and elsewhere while reading it. Simply unbelievable. I will not be surprised if Ms Koivunen is already a member of YJA-STAR)

3. The subject extremely complex roots within political and socio-economic history, involving Ottoman Empire, First World War, Cold War, complex tribal relations, Syrian, Bulgarian and Soviet interventions, 1st adn 2nd Gulf Wars, Saddam, Esad and Iranian revolution etc. You should be "armed" with sufficient background in order to get a better understanding. Only after than you can better understand how a Marxist-Leninist organization can have a manifestation full of ethnic bravado and anthropological explanations (in early 1980's).

As for military / tactical POV, I can only wish you good luck, since even us Turkish citizens have the slightest idea on tactics and strategy by (an increasing) number of books by former / retired personnel who served in 1990's in the region.

Summary: Good luck. But don't expect to get a good number of sources from different POV's and sides. You will be bombarded by sources directly/indirectly supported by PKK and/or a huge number of NGO-supported materiel built up with micro-nationalist motives.

Jedburgh

01-16-2011, 12:09 AM

Mehmedin Kitabi: Güneydoğu'da Savaşmış Askerler Anlatıyor (http://www.ceng.metu.edu.tr/~e112908/mehmet.htm). Unfortunately, I'm not aware of an English edition.
Hey, it is available in translation: Voices from the Front: Turkish Soldiers on the War with the Kurdish Guerrillas (http://www.amazon.com/Voices-Front-Turkish-Soldiers-Guerrillas/dp/1403961204)

Now I have to pick it up and read it so I can compare it with the original Turkish.

The literature has a lot of articles, books and other materiel directly and indirectly financed and/or suppported by PKK and its extensions. The book "Mehmedin Kitabi" is one of them: having an incredible number of inconsistencies and mistakes about military service and the situation in the SE region of Turkey.
There is certainly a certain chunk of material written on the conflict that is linked to (or supportive of) the PKK. But having worked extensively with the Turkish military since the mid-80's, I will state unequivocally that this statement is very wrong about Nadire Mater's book. The strength of Mater's work is in the spectrum of sources she interviewed: the vast majority were ethnic Turks of different backgrounds and educational levels, but she also interviewed Armenian, Greek, Kurdish (Shafii (http://www.let.uu.nl/~martin.vanbruinessen/personal/publications/Bruinessen_Ethnic_identity_Kurds.pdf) and Alevi (http://www.uga.edu/islam/alevivanb.html)), Laz, Greek, and Roma conscripts who served in the SE. Despite the much tighter censorship of the time, the first printing was permitted without any substantial interference. However, the rapid selling-out of that first printing, and immediate start on second and third printings, prodded the Turkish authorities to ban the book and to charge the author under Article 159 of the penal code (insulting and belittling the military).

The PKK engaged in very brutal actions, killing schoolteachers and many other civilian representatives of the Turkish state in the SE in the style of Maoist "armed propaganda", with the '90s seeing those actions implemented across a broad swathe of the region. This has been extensively documented, and there is little need to demonize the organization as they have been condemned by their own actions.

But some of the attempted revisionism that attempts to tone down what was the heavy-handed response of the Turkish military of that time period really does the Turkish military and the Turkish state no real service, and only serves to obstruct or contaminate potentially substantive lessons learned. ("Revisionism" now - at the height of the campaign there was extensive censorship as well as large numbers of journalists imprisoned (http://cpj.org/reports/1999/05/turkeyreport.php) while attempting to report on events) Not to mention that it makes the revisionists look foolish, as those actions were also extensively documented, and thus refusing to admit them only results in failing to learn their lessons.

This failure to learn by the Turkish state and military is currently reflected in the re-emergence of the PKK as a violent actor over the past few years, bringing armed conflict up to a simmer in the SE (along with a few scattered bombings in cities in the western part of the country).

uwew

01-16-2011, 12:35 PM

Thank you all for the info provided and thanks to the mods for moving this thread to the right subforum.

I am not planning to research this topic academically. I am just curious, because -IMHO- there are some similarities between the situation in Kurdistan and (Northern) Afghanistan and maybe we could learn something from the Turkish experiences?

As far as I can see in the sparse media coverage the conflict gets, the Turks have made some progress when changing from a kinetic to a more population centric approach, alleviating some of the grievances of the Kurdish population. And it would be interesting to know how successful the system of village guards ( koruculuk sistemi ) is. And why things started to get worse again in 2007.

Maybe some of the more knowledgeable forum members would offer some thoughts on these questions?

Jedburgh

01-16-2011, 02:22 PM

....I am just curious, because -IMHO- there are some similarities between the situation in Kurdistan and (Northern) Afghanistan and maybe we could learn something from the Turkish experiences?
As regards direct application to Afghanistan, there is really very little of value to be learned from the Turkish experience, aside from in a very broad and general manner - which doesn't provide much beyond what is considered "classic" COIN and a lot of this-is-what-you-should-not-do type lessons.

The situation of the Kurds as an ethnic minority in Turkey for a very long time was quite unique, because not only did they suffer from the common minority complaints of political underrepresentation and regional economic neglect, but their very identity as an ethnic minority was under attack. For decades, the Kurdish language was banned, Kurds were forbidden to given their children Kurdish names, Kurdish place names were changed to Turkish, and the centralized Turkish education system even taught that there was no such people as the Kurds. Unsurprisingly, this built up a lot of resentment.

However, even with all that, only a small minority of the Kurds supported the PKK - even at the height of the conflict. Although many may have agreed with their separatist views, the vast majority just could not accept their strident Marxist ideology. As mentioned earlier, the PKK's tactic of murdering schoolteachers, other state employees and anyone they perceived as "collaborators", as well as their habit of looting villages of supplies, also did not earn them many friends among ordinary village Kurds.

....And it would be interesting to know how successful the system of village guards ( koruculuk sistemi ) is.
The village guard system (http://web.gc.cuny.edu/dept/rbins/IUCSHA/fellows/Balta-paper.pdf) forced ordinary Kurds to choose between support for the state and support for the PKK. If a given village did not choose to support the state, in many cases they were forcibly displaced (http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004BE3B1/(httpInfoFiles)/A0D784C014878D59802570BA00568E64/$file/Turkey%20-October%202005.pdf) by the military. Sometimes they fled due to attacks by neighboring village guards. If they did choose to support the state, they immediately became targets for the PKK. On the other hand, some villages chose to join the village guards simply because it gave them a state-sanctioned opportunity to settle old feuds with neighboring villages. These problems with the village guard system were experienced by the US to some degree with "local protection forces" in Iraq, but nowhere near the scale that they occurred in Turkey. Definitely not a program to be emulated.

Another significant difference from Afghanistan is that the PKK's leadership under Öcalan was highly centralized. When he was captured PKK operations virtually ceased. It was a true example of "beheading the snake", similar to what happened to Sendero Luminoso when Guzmán and then Ramírez were captured. The failure of HVI targeting to significantly disrupt threat operations in Afghanistan clearly demonstrates that, unlike the Maoist insurgencies, no single individual is running the show.

The slow reemergence of the PKK and violent Kurdish separatism in recent years is an indictment of Turkish state policies. The capture of Öcalan provided them with a golden opportunity to stabilize the SE and win over the Kurdish population through positive measures. This did happen to a degree, but only in fits and starts interspersed with old-fashioned Turkish refusal to accept Kurdish ethnic identity. The much-discussed "Kurdish opening" (http://www.silkroadstudies.org/new/docs/silkroadpapers/1010Karaveli.pdf) in Turkish politics has achieved some very positive gains, but it took a long time to reach that point. But the current violence is again not supported by the average Kurd in Turkey, and is still at a very low point (in comparison to the '90s), thus the state still has an opportunity to move forward and successfully interdict/disrupt the nascent insurgency before it grows into a serious military problem again.

Asayish

01-20-2011, 05:17 PM

I'm writing a paper about HR and TSK's COIN strategy against the PKK for my MA. There are not much books/articles about it. Indeed, an issue is the objectivity of authors, but there is some academic research on the subject. Its not very strange that majority of the Kurdish population doesn't actively support the PKK, just like the majority of Afghans doesn't support the Taliban or the majority of the Algerians didn't support the FLN. Its not relevant. In this case both the PKK and the TSK targeted the civilian population.

Bruinessen has written some articles about Kurdish identity/PKK, not much about COIN
http://www.let.uu.nl/~martin.vanbruinessen/personal/publications/index-text.html#articles#1

Turkish vision on preventing use of Children by PKK:
Preventing the PKK’s Misuse of Children by Introducing Community Policing
http://www.coedat.nato.int/publications/datr2/Ali%20Dikici.pdf

Turkish Culture and its Influence on the Counter-Insurgency Campaign Against the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK)

Ihaneti Gördum (book of former general ): http://www.boxca.com/a5lemmgvszuo/Erdal_Sar%C4%B1zeybek_-_%C4%B0haneti_G%C3%B6rd%C3%BCm.pdf.html (downloadable)
http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/ptb/hhv/vcce/vch7/Enneli%20paper.pdf

Asayish

01-20-2011, 05:27 PM

http://www.ijbssnet.com/journals/Vol._2_No._1;_January_2011/13.pdf
This can be used too. Also Turkish vision on CT (Not COIN).

One should also think of Sri Lanka as an example. Sri Lanka and Turkey are very much comparable. Exclusion of ethnic identity and ethnic nationalist/communist organizations trying to control territory in an insurgency strategy similar to the Vietcong in Vietnam. Sri Lanka defeated the LTTE, but Turkey didn't 'defeat' the PKK yet.

Asayish

01-20-2011, 05:54 PM

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA494908&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Actually a paper 'what we can learn from COIN in Turkey for Iraq/Afgh'. There are more papers if you search on google.com/scholar

davidbfpo

03-17-2011, 10:51 PM

An IISS Strategic Comment on the changes in Kurdistan:http://www.iiss.org/publications/strategic-comments/past-issues/volume-17-2011/march/winds-of-change-in-iraqi-kurdistan/

TDB

10-24-2011, 06:04 PM

Reuters) - Turkish tanks and armoured vehicles crossed into northern Iraq headed in the direction of a Kurdish militant camp, Turkish security sources said on Monday.

The incursion came as cross-border operations continued in the wake of last week's attack by Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) fighters that killed 24 Turkish soldiers.

The armoured column, with hundreds of troops, was moving towards a militant camp at Haftanin, around 20 km (12 miles) from the Habur border post and near the Iraqi city of Zakho, the sources said.

Several hundred PKK fighters were believed to be based at Haftanin, the sources said. Warplanes took off earlier from bases in Diyarbakir and Malatya to launch airstrikes on the camp as the latest phase of operations began on Monday afternoon.

Separately, the head of Turkey's armed forces, General Necdet Ozel, offered a review of recent military operations for NTV news channel.

"The cross border operation that started on October 20 continues in a number of regions, within the framework of a determined struggle against terrorism," Ozel said in written answers to questions from NTV and posted on its website.

Turkish air strikes have killed 250 to 270 Kurdish militants, wounded 210 and destroyed many arms stores in northern Iraq since August 17, Ozel said in the text.

Turkish warplanes launched air strikes against Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) guerrillas in northern Iraq in mid-August in retaliation for a string of PKK attacks in southeast Turkey.

The military launched fresh air-backed ground operations against the militants last week on both sides of the mountainous Turkey-Iraq border after simultaneous PKK attacks killed 24 Turkish soldiers in Hakkari province on the Iraqi border.

On Saturday, the military said it had killed 49 militants during two days of fighting in a valley on the Turkish side of the frontier.

Ankara's reaction to one of the deadliest attacks on its security forces in a conflict that began three decades ago had fuelled speculation that Turkey could move to a full-blown incursion to clear out PKK camps deeper inside northern Iraq.

More than 40,000 people have been killed since the conflict began in 1984. The United States, the European Union and Turkey designate the PKK as a terrorist organisation.

Iraq in the Middle, Part III: F. Stephen Larrabee on Iraq’s Relations with Turkey (http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/iraq-in-the-middle-part-iii-f-stephen-larrabee-on-iraq%E2%80%99s-relations-with-turkey)

Entry Excerpt:

--------
Read the full post (http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/iraq-in-the-middle-part-iii-f-stephen-larrabee-on-iraq%E2%80%99s-relations-with-turkey) and make any comments at the SWJ Blog (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog).
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

Tukhachevskii

08-19-2012, 03:34 AM

...and how they enter into the strategic tapestry that is currently unravelling in the region. Post-Assad Syria (should there be one) could very well have knock on effects for Iraqi and Turkish Kurds especially if the, admittedly small number, of Syrain Kurds are able to make some gaisn for their own ends.

In Syria, role of Kurds divides opposition (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/in-syria-role-of-kurds-divides-opposition/2012/08/18/a841e1c2-e896-11e1-936a-b801f1abab19_story.html)

In both the Turkish and American capitals, the policy decision to intervene in Syria has been delayed pending further review of logistical and military contingencies. The fact that there is no appetite on the part of the Syrian opposition for direct outside intervention, with the exception of limited protection in terms of no-fly zones or buffer areas to shelter civilians, has also contributed to this delay.
...
Over dinner last week with senior editors of print media in Ankara, Deputy Prime Minister Blent Arın signaled that Turkey is pondering an operation in the Kandil Mountains in northern Iraq, where the PKK headquarters are located. The government has already obtained authorization from Parliament to launch a cross-border operation in northern Iraq. But Ankara is keenly aware that it needs to coordinate this action with the US, not only for political cover against an international reaction to a military incursion into Iraqi territory, but also to secure logistical support, in particular intelligence, from the Americans. ... (more in article)

Regards

Mike

TheCurmudgeon

08-19-2012, 05:19 PM

Today, winning the hearts and minds of the Kurdish people living in all four neighboring countries is the most important objective for Turkey. As most Kurds are frustrated with the decades-long PKK terror wreaking havoc on their daily lives, they will largely welcome Turkish troops taking out hard-core militants so that peace and stability can finally come to Kurdish areas.Wait on Syria, push for Kandil (http://http://www.todayszaman.com/columnist-289805-wait-on-syria-push-or-kandil.html)

Interesting slant on things. Wonder if this thought pattern is behind Turkey's lack of interest in the Kurds of northern Syria?

davidbfpo

08-19-2012, 06:46 PM

Don't worry I am sure the Kurds along Syria's northern border will have their day with the Turkish military. The reported move of thousands of PKK fighters into Syria, before May 2012, as helpful "guests", may not have been a wise move.

Today, winning the hearts and minds of the Kurdish people living in all four neighboring countries is the most important objective for Turkey. As most Kurds are frustrated with the decades-long PKK terror wreaking havoc on their daily lives, they will largely welcome Turkish troops taking out hard-core militants so that peace and stability can finally come to Kurdish areas.

one might conclude that he is looking forward to a NeoHittite-NeoMitanni Concordat (http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/ranghaya/suppiluliuma_shattiwaza_treaty.htm).

Turkey has, as well, to look out for the millions of Turkmen in Syria, Iraq and Iran (HT to wm for that one). Thus, Turkey's Foreign Minister Davidson's (another HT to wm for that translation) visit to Iraqi Kurdistan may have had a multiple symbolism.

Bill Moore

08-20-2012, 02:13 AM

Today, winning the hearts and minds of the Kurdish people living in all four neighboring countries is the most important objective for Turkey. As most Kurds are frustrated with the decades-long PKK terror wreaking havoc on their daily lives, they will largely welcome Turkish troops taking out hard-core militants so that peace and stability can finally come to Kurdish areas.

It is difficult to make sense of the various sources and their views on reports of Kurdish maneuvering in Iraq and Syria. It is important to point out that while apparently most Kurds want a Kurdish State, the Kurds are not united. They have numerous political parties, the KDP and PUK being the largest ones, and their relationship with the PKK varies depending on the realpolitik issue in currency.

- The various Kurdish parties will likely struggle with each other for power creating opportunities for exploitation by state actors in the region.

- Turkey making direct deals for oil with Kurds without going through Baghdad, which infuriates Baghdad.

- Kurdish peshmerga preventing the Iraqi Army from sealing the Syrian-Iraqi border.

- Maliki is pro-Assad, while Barzani is pro-resistance and is offering support to the resistance from Iraq. Where does Iran stand on this? What actions will they take?

- PKK is increasing it level of activity in Turkey, while KDP and Turkey appear to be reaching an agreement, yet reports of the KDP and PKK making a secret deal.

- Same as it has been for years, the Kurds will be a player, but they will be leveraged by other non-state actors, Turkey, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Israel, and probably the U.S.. Without unity how much power will the Kurds ultimately have?

- The various Kurdish parties will likely struggle with each other for power creating opportunities for exploitation by state actors in the region.

- Turkey making direct deals for oil with Kurds without going through Baghdad, which infuriates Baghdad.

- Kurdish peshmerga preventing the Iraqi Army from sealing the Syrian-Iraqi border.

- Maliki is pro-Assad, while Barzani is pro-resistance and is offering support to the resistance from Iraq. Where does Iran stand on this? What actions will they take?

- PKK is increasing it level of activity in Turkey, while KDP and Turkey appear to be reaching an agreement, yet reports of the KDP and PKK making a secret deal.

- Same as it has been for years, the Kurds will be a player, but they will be leveraged by other non-state actors, Turkey, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Israel, and probably the U.S.. Without unity how much power will the Kurds ultimately have?

Assad’s Kurdish strategy appears to be to help the PKK to take control of the Kurdish regions of Syria in the North East. His aim is to hurt both the Free Syrian Army and Turkey, which are leading the opposition against him. In general, his strategy is to weaken the Sunni Arabs of Syria.

and

The Kurdish parts of Syria will undoubtedly become the focus of the power struggle that is emerging in the region over Syria. Sunni Arabs and Turks will line up against it. Shiite forces will be inclined to encourage Kurdish independence if only to hurt the Sunni Arabs by playing minorities of every stripe against the against the FSA, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the US.

But what should the Kurds do? All Kurds are looking to take advantage of the collapse of central authority in Syria. They see this as an historic opportunity to press for their freedom and national rights. But how hard should they press and how fast? Should they work with Turkey against Assad or should they fight Turkey and ally with Assad? Is this a moment for caution or for audacity?

TheCurmudgeon

08-20-2012, 03:05 PM

I am not a UN analyst, but if the Kurdish area of Syria and the Kurdish area of Iraq were to break away and form an independent state, could they request a UN Peace Keeping presence?:confused:

Surferbeetle

08-26-2012, 04:58 PM

H/T to Dave Dilegge to linking to this article in this morning's roundup.

Sinan Ulgen is the chairman of the Istanbul-based think tank EDAM and a visiting scholar at Carnegie Europe.

The National Interest, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_National_Interest

Syria used to be the poster child for Ankara’s “zero problems with neighbors” policy. At the peak of their rapprochement, Turkey and Syria were holding joint cabinet meetings and talking about spearheading a common market in the Middle East. Then the Arab wave of reforms reached Damascus. The relationship turned hostile as the Syrian leadership resisted reforms and engaged in large-scale massacres to subdue the opposition.

With this policy of direct confrontation, Ankara not only strove to obtain the moral high ground. It also sought to precipitate the fall of Assad while building a relationship with the future leadership of Syria by heavily investing in the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated Syrian National Council.

Today, this policy of forcefully pushing the regime change agenda in Syria is under criticism domestically as some of the risks of a post-Assad world are becoming clearer.

The fear in Turkey is of Syria’s disintegration into ethnically and religiously purer ministates, with a Kurdish entity in the north, an Alawite entity in the west and a Sunni entity in the rest. The Kurdish opposition’s recent unilateral power grab in northeastern Syria rekindled Turkish concerns about the emergence of an independent Kurdish entity linking the north of Iraq to the north of Syria.

davidbfpo

08-31-2012, 11:42 AM

A wide ranging article:
The middle-east’s power-balance is in flux amid state tensions and political conflicts. In a two-part article, Bill Park - who was recently in Ankara and Erbil - examines the impact of these changes on Turkey and its neighbours, especially the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) of northern Iraq.

In part one, he looks at the Iraqi dimension; in part two, at Syria’s conflict, sectarianism and the wider Kurdish question.

I'd not say it was a 'new' factor, just one that persists and every so often raises its profile. I can recall the time when Iran and Israel supported the Kurds in Iraq, then suddenly Iran and Iraq made an agreement, leaving the Kurds somewhat exposed.

AdamG

10-15-2012, 04:54 PM

DIYARBAKIR, Turkey: Kurdish militants killed 10 soldiers and wounded at least 60 when they fired rockets at a military convoy in eastern Turkey on Tuesday, security sources said.

The past few months have seen some of the heaviest fighting since the PKK, considered a terrorist organisation by Turkey, the United States and the European Union, took up arms in 1984 with the aim of carving out a Kurdish state.

Iraq urges the Kurdish autonomy to approve the deployment of troops on the border with Turkey to prevent the Turkish troops' entering Iraq, as well as to stop air strikes on the country against the militants of Kurdistan Workers' Party, head of the Iraqi parliamentary security committee Iskander Witwit told Trend on Wednesday.

As the confrontation between Turkey and Syria escalates, Ankara is readying not only for possible war against Syrian President Bashar Assad, but also against Kurdish separatists. Turkey fears they may be emboldened by the situation in Syria and resurrect their cause.

An article by Bill Park, with aspects my media watching had not spotted, e.g.:
..more than 600 Kurdish prisoners are entering the eighth week of a hunger-strike...

Then there is the political decision to:
The vigorous crackdown on even relatively moderate Kurdish leaders removes the most likely interlocutors from the political scene, and surely serves to harden Kurdish sentiment

Demography could alter the scene, my emphasis:
More compelling is the recent estimate by the Turkish statistical institute that there are over 22 million Kurds in Turkey, constituting more than 30% of the republic’s population. Furthermore, the Kurdish birthrate in Turkey is reckoned to be at least twice that of ethnic Turks. Although these figures are fuzzy around the edges, they suggest that within a couple of generations, Kurds could well make up the majority of Turkey’s population. True, many are already assimilated; but can the government really believe that the current campaign of political repression and marginalisation, and violence rather than dialogue, stands any chance of assimilating the remainder of them - ever, let alone before such time as Kurds outnumber Turks?

Iraq’s premier has warned Kurdish regional security forces not to advance towards government troop positions, a military spokesman said on Monday, after deadly clashes in a flashpoint northern town.

Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s office warned the Kurdish forces, known as peshmerga, “not to change their positions or approach the [federal] armed forces,” Iraqi military spokesman Colonel Dhia al-Wakil said in a message received by AFP.

http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/11/19/250558.html

AdamG

11-21-2012, 02:21 AM

TUZ KHURMATU, Iraq — A shootout over an unpaid gasoline bill in this small but hotly contested town has sent tensions soaring between the Iraqi government in Baghdad and the northern region of Kurdistan, threatening to ignite the Arab-Kurdish conflict that many have long feared.

On Tuesday, the Iraqi army rushed thousands of troops and reinforcements to the area after the Kurdish regional government placed its pesh merga militia forces on high alert along the arc of disputed territory that spans the borders of the semiautonomous Kurdish enclave.

Iraqi leaders in the central government and the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region appear to be stepping back from the brink of open warfare.

They agreed Monday to withdraw the thousands of troops deployed in the past week to Iraq's disputed territories, following a fatal Nov. 16 shootout between the two sides. The deal appears to be holding despite deadly bombings Tuesday in Kirkuk and Baghdad that may have been designed to provoke conflict.

RAS AL AYN, Syria -- A tense truce between Syrian rebels and a Kurdish militia held Tuesday in the city of Ras al Ayn, fast against the border with Turkey. But neither side hid its disdain for the other, and both continued to hold prisoners in a standoff that suggests rebel hopes to push their control further east faces an all but certain challenge.

Turkey is holding talks with the jailed head of the PKK Kurdish militant group, Abdullah Ocalan, to push for its disarmament, officials say.....The Turkish prime minister's top political adviser said the government had concluded that it would be unlikely to defeat the outlawed PKK militarily.

Prime ministerial adviser Yalcin Akdogan said the intelligence services were holding discussions with Ocalan:
The goal is the disarmament of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party)...The government supports any dialogue to this end that could result in a halt to violence. You cannot get results and abolish an organisation only with armed struggle.

Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20880944

Interesting timing when one looks at the international aspects of the conflict next door in Syria.

davidbfpo

01-04-2013, 12:52 PM

A Turkish newspaper report, which opens with:
Terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) leader Abdullah calan stated that the era of armed struggle to achieve the political goals of the Kurds is over. He was speaking in a meeting with two Kurdish lawmakers, who made rare a visit to the PKK leader, being held on an island prison, on Thursday, signaling that Turkey is negotiating with the terrorist organization over ending a conflict that has killed tens of thousands over the past three decades.

Ocalan in jail since 1999 has power:
his order, made after a visit from his brother, to end a 68-day hunger strike by PKK terrorists in prisons across Turkey was immediately obeyed.

Link:http://www.todayszaman.com/news-303039-.html

It is curious that an imprisoned leader can make such decisions. How a nation and its opponents in an insurgency / terrorist campaign use law enforcement, with imprisonment, as a tactic to get results is an perplexing question. It took a long time for the UK to think through a LE approach in Northern Ireland, even then it took PIRA just as long. Both Italy and Spain have used the tactic with great effect, but is little understood or documented IMO in English.

davidbfpo

01-08-2013, 05:24 PM

This long running thread has been closed, a new thread has been created 'The Kurds are a changing' at:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=17311

davidbfpo

01-08-2013, 05:36 PM

An excellent article on the changing situation in Syria for the small Kurdish minority and the interplay with the PKK who seek a new form self-determination for the Kurds in Turkey:http://syriaintransition.com/2013/01/08/my-take-on-the-what-the-kurds-of-syria-have-been-up-to-mr-ocalans-philosophy/

It opens with:
One of the few winners of the Syrian uprising are the country’s Kurds. For the first time Syrian Kurds are running their own affairs independently of Damascus under the tutelage of PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan.

(Concludes)In contrast, the Arab opposition has brought death and destruction upon its towns and populations, with no guarantee of a favorable outcome or of having the necessary capacity to administer areas under its control effectively. Once the regime in Damascus collapses, it is doubtful whether the sacrifices of (predominantly) Sunni Arabs will compare favorably with the rewards that they will reap. The Kurds of Syria have taken the cash in hand and waived the rest.

davidbfpo

02-01-2013, 11:31 PM

Published a few days ago by ICG 'Syria’s Kurds: A Struggle Within a Struggle'; too long to find a good quote:http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/Middle%20East%20North%20Africa/Iraq%20Syria%20Lebanon/Syria/136-syrias-kurds-a-struggle-within-a-struggle.pdf?utm_source=syria-report&utm_medium=3&utm_campaign=mremail

davidbfpo

07-23-2013, 01:54 PM

An Open Democracy comment by a Kurd, rather lengthy so no quote found:http://www.opendemocracy.net/zana-khasraw-gul/where-are-syrian-kurds-heading-amidst-civil-war-in-syria

I do wonder if the regime starts to gain strength, how will the Kurds respond to the prospect of the army etc appearing close to their enclaves?

davidbfpo

08-28-2013, 02:32 PM

The position of the Kurds in Syria re-appeared last week with news of a large exodus across a new pontoon bridge into Iraqi Kurdistan, which was briefly reported and then - as the Kurds know too well - disappeared. See:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23745201

Here is a report, with more details on the fighting between the Kurds and the Jihadists:http://www.opendemocracy.net/rozh-ahmad/mass-slaughter-of-civilian-kurds-in-syria-ignites-heavy-clashes-and-mass-exodus

davidbfpo

11-16-2013, 01:59 PM

Syria’s Kurds have strengthened their hold on the north-east of the country, carving out territory as they drive out #Islamic militant fighters #allied to the rebellion and declaring their own civil administration in areas under their control.

This week’s moves could be a first step toward creating an autonomous region similar to the one Kurds run across the border as virtually a separate country within Iraq. But the Kurds’ drive has angered rebels fighting to topple Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

The conflict in neighboring Syria has provided both opportunities and problems for Iraq’s Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). Kurdish President Massoud Barzani and to a lesser extent the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) have attempted to forge ties with Syrian Kurds and shape events there to their benefit. These have only met with limited success as the Syrians have their own agendas. To help explain this policy is Wladimir van Wilgenburg who until recently was based in Irbil, and is an analyst for the Jamestown Foundation out of Washington DC, and writes for Al Monitor.

continued (http://musingsoniraq.blogspot.com/2013/12/explaining-iraqi-kurdistans-policy.html)

…Despite differences and rivalries among the Kurdish parties, they all have the same goals. These include autonomy for the Kurdish region or the Kurdish right to self-determination, constitutional recognition of the Kurds as a distinct nation with their fundamental rights, and use of the Kurdish language in education. Unlike the Sunni Arab opposition dominated by dozens of radical Islamist groups, the Kurdish YPG is the only armed force charged with the protection and the defense of the Kurdish population and the Kurdish areas. So far there has been no serious internal fight among the Kurds that could harm the YPG's monopoly that could be detrimental to their future….

JWing

02-28-2014, 08:30 PM

The main Kurdish group in Syria are the PYD who are a branch of the PKK from Turkey. They want an autonomous region, which they declared in the north a couple months ago. They do not want independence however as that is not a goal of the PKK either in Syria or in Turkey. The Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) which is the dominant Kurdish party in Iraq has constantly tried to put together other Kurdish groups in Syria to be rivals of the PYD but have failed again and again. The KDP has come out against the autonomous region, while other Iraqi Kurdish parties like the PUK and Change have supported it. The events in Syria put to rest the idea that there is a single unified Kurdish agenda in the Middle East and shows the divisions that exist within the community, which is true for all the communities in the area whether that be Arabs or Sunnis or Shiites or whatever other kind of groupings that are usually applied.

Jedburgh

03-25-2014, 06:31 PM

Rudaw, 25 March 2014: YPG Calls on all Kurdish Groups to Unite Against Jihadist Threats in Rojava (http://rudaw.net/english/middleeast/syria/25032014)

All Kurdish groups in the region must set aside their differences and unite to counter threats by Islamic extremists in Syrian Kurdistan (Rojava), said the People’s Protection Units (YPG) (https://www.facebook.com/YPGonline.EN), the military wing of the Democratic Union Party (PYD) (http://www.pydrojava.net/eng/) which is the most powerful Kurdish force in Syrian Kurdistan.

"All the parties and forces of Rojava (http://rojavareport.wordpress.com), the officials of the autonomous Cantons of Cizire (http://en.firatnews.com/news/news/cizire-canton-declared-democratic-autonomy-new.htm), Kobani (http://www.pukmedia.com/EN/EN_Direje.aspx?Jimare=18386) and Afrin (http://rudaw.net/english/interview/02022014), the Kurdish National Council and Council of Western Kurdistan must put aside their differences at this stage," the YPG said in a statement.

It suspended military operations in the three cantons, created in the northeast last month by its political overseer, the PYD, saying it would only act defensively.

However, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has vowed to take control over the Kobani area and annex it to areas under its control. In the past several days, it has launched heavy assaults on Kobani areas, but has failed to capture territories due to resistance by YPG fighters….

......The PYD did not liberate Kurdish areas of Syria: it moved in where the regime receded; most often, it took over the latter’s governance structures and simply relabelled them, rather than generating its own unique model as it claims. Fringe Arab, Syriac and Assyrian leaders are participating, even if they do not adhere to its ideology, as a way to ensure security and access to services for their communities.

Rojava is thus more shell than rising sun, an instrument that enables the regime to control Kurdish areas. Established in isolation from the society it means to govern, it is overburdened by an ideological foundation with which most Syrian Kurds and non-Kurds scarcely identify. Its political architecture enjoys only narrow buy-in beyond the PYD affiliates and co-opted personalities, and international recognition is not on the horizon. More than three years after the Syrian uprising erupted, the movement’s popular legitimacy still seems largely a function of the threat that gave rise to it....